Rosenberg Bros. & Co. v. Arnold

9th Cir.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Citations: 283 F.2d 406, 3 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 222

Decision Date: 10/10/1960

Docket Number: No. 16762

Jurisdiction: U.S.

Bluebook Citation: Rosenberg Bros. & Co. v. Arnold, 283 F.2d 406, 3 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 222 (9th Cir. 1960)

More Cases: 9th Cir. decisions from 1960

ROSENBERG BROTHERS & CO., Inc., a corporation, Arnold-Hoover, Incorporated, a corporation, Appellants, v. Albert ARNOLD, Appellee.

Attorneys

Johnson & Stanton, Marshall A. Staun-ton, Gardiner Johnson, San Francisco, Cal., for appellants.
Severson, Zang, Werson, Berke & Larson, Nathan R. Berke, David C. Bull, San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.

majority PER CURIAM.

In view of the extreme liberality generally in favoring amendments to pleadings under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the general policy thereunder of wrapping in one bundle all matters concerning the same subject matter, we hold it was error not to let appellant’s amended counterclaim stay in the pleadings.

The appellee says the counterclaim is “delay” and “more delay.” The trial court perhaps was so impressed. If henceforward the appellant-defendant should be guilty of delaying tactics, the trial court has a number of available sanctions. And, in view of the leniency in permitting reinstatement, we do say that the defendant has an obligation to press for a speedy and early determination of the cause.

The final order dismissing the amended counterclaim is reversed.

Chat with this case using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this case, check whether it is still good law, and see every case that cites it. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.