Case Name: JENSEN v. BUCKEYE S. S. CO.
Court: United States District Court for the Western District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1942-07-09
Citations: 2 F.R.D. 411
Docket Number: Civil Action No. 967
Parties: JENSEN v. BUCKEYE S. S. CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Rules Decisions
Volume: 2
Pages: 411–412

Head Matter:
JENSEN v. BUCKEYE S. S. CO.
Civil Action No. 967.
District Court, W. D. New York.
July 9, 1942.
Desmond & Drury, of Buffalo, N. Y., for plaintiff.
Duncan, Leckie, McCreary, Schlitz & Hinslea, of Cleveland, Ohio, and Brown, Ely & Richards, of Buffalo, N. Y. (Laurence E. Coffey, of Buffalo, N. Y., of counsel), for defendant.

Opinion:
KNIGHT, District Judge.
Plaintiff moves for an order requiring the discovery and inspection of the list containing the names of the members of the crew of the defendant company and also requiring "the testimony" of certain unidentified employees of the defendant "to be taken upon oral examination" and requiring "the above described witnesses to attend and be examined at a time" when defendant's vessel arrives at the port of Buffalo during the course of the navigation season; and requiring defendant to give notice of the arrival of its vessel in port and to compel the attendance of such employees for examination.
The motion in so far as it is directed to discovery and inspection of a list containing the names of the aforesaid employees is granted.
The motion in so far as it is directed to require the depositions of such employees to be taken and requiring the defendant to give notice of the arrival of the vessel of the defendant in port and to compel the attendance of said employees as witnesses is denied. No warrant for such authorization is seen. When plaintiff shall have obtained the names of these witnesses, there is ample provision in law to obtain their testimony. Further, it is obvious that this court has not the authority to direct the defendant to produce these employees for examination.