363 F.2d 371 - Gostin v. Nelson — 363 F.2d 371

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently February 2008

3 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1See also D.C., 213 F.Supp. 164.

¶2George Scott Stewart, III, Philadelphia, Pa. (Charles W. Gross, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

¶3Charles K. Keil, Wilmington, Del. (Howard M. Handelman, Bayard, Brill, Russell & Handelman, Wilmington, Del., on the brief), for appellee.

¶4Before SMITH and FREEDMAN, Circuit Judges, and MILLER, District Judge.

¶5OPINION OF THE COURT

¶6PER CURIAM.

¶7This action for breach of contract came before the court below on successive motions filed by the appellee under Fed.Rules Civ.Proc., rule 56, 28 U.S.C.A. After the entry of a partial judgment on the issue of liability the court entered a final judgment in favor of the appellee on the issue of damages. On this appeal the appellant contests only the latter judgment.

¶8The appellee’s second motion was predicated on the appellant’s answers to interrogatories. These answers furnished an adequate basis for the assessment of damages. The appellant filed a counter-affidavit, the relevant portions of which were based entirely on information and belief and not on personal knowledge. Since the counter-affidavit did not meet the requirements of subdivision (e) of the said rule, as amended, the court properly disregarded it and entered judgment for the appel-lee. Durovic v. Palmer, 342 F.2d 634 (7th Cir. 1965); F. S. Bowen Electric Co. v. J. D. Hedin Construction Co., 114 *372U.S.App.D.C. 361, 316 F.2d 362 (1963) ; Hoston v. J. R. Watkins Company, 300 F.2d 869 (9th Cir. 1962).

¶9The judgment of the court below, D.C., 41 F.R.D. 48, will be affirmed.