Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Local Enforcemtn Of Foreign National Judgments—A New Standard, Anon
Local Enforcemtn Of Foreign National Judgments—A New Standard, Anon
Washington Law Review
Defendant, a resident of the District of Columbia, borrowed money from plaintiff, a Canadian resident, and secured the loan with a mortgage on a tract of land located in Ontario. The mortgage was executed in the District of Columbia and contained a clause by which defendant assented to jurisdiction of Ontario courts by substituted service in the event litigation became necessary. Plaintiff, upon defendant's default, sought foreclosure of the mortgage and a judgment in Ontario. Pursuant to Ontario statute, defendant was personally served in the District of Columbia with a writ and notice of the Ontario proceedings. Defendant failed to …
Defendant's Insurance Policy And Written Witnesses' Statements Held Discoverable, Anon
Defendant's Insurance Policy And Written Witnesses' Statements Held Discoverable, Anon
Washington Law Review
Plaintiff sued to recover damages for injuries received while a passenger in defendant's automobile. Upon plaintiff's motion under Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 34, the trial court allowed discovery of defendant's automobile liability insurance policy, and of witnesses' written statements obtained by defendant's counsel, including any written statements of the defendant and plaintiff. On appeal, the Alaska Supreme Court affirmed. Held: Under Alaska Rule of Civil Procedure 34, a plaintiff is entitled to discovery of defendant's insurance policy and any written statements of witnesses which were obtained by defendant's counsel. Miller v. Harpster, 392 P.2d 21 (Alaska 1964).
Serving Substantial Justice—A Dilemma, Philip A. Trautman
Serving Substantial Justice—A Dilemma, Philip A. Trautman
Washington Law Review
In an article written three years ago, this author introduced the subject with the observation that, of the several grounds for a new trial in Washington, one in particular had created considerable difficulty for the supreme court, trial judges, and counsel. This was the rule permitting a new trial when "substantial justice has not been done," and followed by the provision that, "In all cases wherein the trial court grants a motion for a new trial, it shall, in the order granting the motion, give definite reasons of law and facts for so doing."