Hinfin Realty Corp. v. Pittston Co.
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
206 F.R.D. 350 (2002)
- Written by DeAnna Swearingen, LLM
Facts
Hinfin Realty Corp. and others (plaintiffs) sued Pittston Co. (Pittston) (defendant) for environmental damage to their property on July 24, 2000, but took no action on the suit until they amended their complaint on February 1, 2001. Very little discovery followed. Pittson moved to stay the proceedings, which the plaintiffs opposed. Pittston began making discovery demands. Hinfin’s president, Donald Death, Sr. then became ill and died. Death, Sr. was an important witness for the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs’ financial situation also deteriorated. Pittston offered the plaintiffs evidence that it was not the proper defendant. The plaintiffs asked Pittston to stipulate to a dismissal without prejudice, so they could determine if Pittston was the correct defendant. Pittston refused. The plaintiffs withdrew their objection to Pittston’s request for a stay. When the stay was denied, the plaintiffs moved for a voluntary dismissal without prejudice, which Pittston opposed. Pittston argued it would be prejudiced if the suit was reinitiated later, because it would be subject to duplicative litigation, witnesses would die, and memories would fade. Alternately, Pittston requested that the court condition a dismissal without prejudice on an award of costs and attorney’s fees totaling $135,000.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Spatt, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 807,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.