Marshall v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Company

CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM
CitationMarshall v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Company, 353 F.2d 737 (5th Cir. 1966)
Decision Date17 January 1966
Docket NumberNo. 22247.,22247.
PartiesMr. and Mrs. Rufus MARSHALL, Jr., Appellants, v. SOUTHERN FARM BUREAU CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellee.

Phil Trice, Lafayette, La., for appellants.

Timothy J. McNamara and Davidson, Meaux, Onebane & Donohoe, Lafayette, La., for appellee.

Before WISDOM and COLEMAN, Circuit Judges, and DAWKINS, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

This was an action in tort for alleged wrongful death arising from a motor vehicle accident. On motion and hearing the District Court ordered Plaintiff-Appellants to file certain documents with the Clerk, for inspection by the Court only. There was a failure fully to comply, so there was a second order to file the documents with the Clerk within two days, or suffer dismissal, reserving to the Appellants the right to apply for any necessary protective order. Twelve days later, after Appellants had unsuccessfully applied to this Court for various extraordinary writs, refusal to file persisted. The suit was then dismissed sua sponte under Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 41(b), but without prejudice as to any other available court of competent jurisdiction.

The District Court clearly acted within the provisions of Rule 41(b) as well as 10(d) of its own rules, which provides that the Clerk is the proper custodian of exhibits introduced into...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
8 cases
  • Thompson v. Relationserve Media Inc
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • June 30, 2010
    ...actions. Link v. Wabash Railroad Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 1388-89, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962); Marshall v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Co., 353 F.2d 737, 737 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 910, 86 S.Ct. 1352, 16 L.Ed.2d 363 Cf. 6 C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice and ......
  • Industrial Building Materials, Inc. v. Interchemical Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Central District of California
    • December 26, 1967
    ...637, 641, 642 (9th Cir. 1963); Hicks v. Bekins Moving & Storage Co., 115 F.2d 406, 408, 409 (9th Cir. 1940); Marshall v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Co., 353 F.2d 737 (5th Cir. 1965), aff'g 36 F.R.D. 186, 189 (W.D.La.1964), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 910, 86 S.Ct. 1352, 16 L.Ed.2d 363 (1966); Dee......
  • Flaksa v. Little River Marine Construction Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • February 8, 1968
    ...U.S. 677, 78 S.Ct. 983, 2 L.Ed.2d 1077 (1958); Marshall v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Co., D.C.La., 36 F.R.D. 186, affirmed, 5 Cir., 353 F.2d 737 (1966), cert. den. 384 U.S. 910, 86 S.Ct. 1352, 16 L. Ed.2d 363; Durgin v. Graham, 5 Cir., 372 F.2d 130 (1967); Deep South Oil Co. of Texas v.......
  • Farinelli v. Campagna
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • November 20, 1975
    ...F.2d 406 (for failure to prosecute); Diapulse Corp. of America v. Curtis Pub. Co. (C.A.2, 1967), 374 F.2d 442; Marshall v. So. Farm Bur. Cas. Co. (C.A.5, 1965), 353 F.2d 737 (for failure to produce for inspection); U.S. v. Cont'l Cas. Co. (C.A.4, 1962), 303 F.2d 91; Weiss Noodle Co. v. Apri......
  • Get Started for Free