About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1967 News for Corp. Counsel 1 (1967)

handle is hein.barjournals/nwsccptc1967 and id is 1 raw text is: LICENSE STILL (UN)LIMITED? The December, 1966 issue referred to activities of the Florida State Bar in proposing a rule which would have limited the action of employed lawyers, and in summoning for hearing two salaried lawyers of a liability insurance company. The adoption of the rule was argued before the Florida Supreme Court on October 4, and on November 23, the Florida Su- preme Court denied the petition for adoption of the rule. Briefs favoring and opposing adoption of the rule, oral arguments, and appearances were made on both sides of the question by a number of Florida attorneys. In the course of the oral argument, it developed that the Court was not aware that the Eleventh Circuit Grievance Committee had issued a citation to two Miami attorneys. Hearings on the citation to these attorneys has been postponed several times, but the citation has not been withdrawn. CORPORATE APPEARANCE IN COURT ONLY BY ATTORNEY The United States courts have again ruled that a corporation, to litigate its rights in a court of law, must employ an attorney at law to appear for it and to represent it in the courts before which its rights need to be adjudicated. This rule is again stated in a Per Curiam decision of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Simbraw, Inc. v. United States, 367 F. 2d 373 (1966). The opinion cites various authorities beginning with Osborn v. Bank, 22 U.S. 738 (1824) and including the opinion of the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in Flora Construction Company v. Fireman's Fund Insur- ance Company, 307 F. 2d 413 (1962). The court also refers to the sound opinion of the District Court in this case, in which it was pointed out that The con- fusion that has resulted in this case from pleadings awkwardly drafted and motions inarticulately presented likewise demonstrates the wisdom of such a policy. In this case the corporation was represented by an attorney before the Court of Appeals, while in Flora the president of the corporation attempted to appear for it in both the District Court and the Court of Appeals. TITLE IN BANKRUPTCY COURTS The Second Circuit recently rejected any title analysis in connection with a creditor's claim to repossess trucks from the trustee of a debtor in a Chapter 10 reorganization. The Court looked only at the remedies of the security agreement concerning repossession, and refused to engage in any distinction between conditional sale and chattel mortgage theory. Applying the Uniform Commercial Code, the Court said . . . the substance of the transaction should govern, regardless of the form of the security agree- ment. Fruehauf Corp. v. Yale Express System, 2nd Cir., December 16, 1966. No. 17 -March, 1967 EXTENSION PHONE LISTENING- WIRETAPPING? The judges of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, interpreting the Pennsylvania wiretapping statute (15 Pa. Stat. Ann. § 2443), split on the question of whether it is illegal to listen in on an extension tele- phone where both parties being overheard have not given their express or implied consent. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. John Murray, 223 A. 2d 102 (1966). The view is widely held that consent of one party gives the listening in on an extension phone (whether by business associates, secretary, family or detective) the blessing of legality. Rathbun v. United States, 355 U.S. 107, 78 S. Ct. 161 (1957) interpreted the federal wiretapping statute, Section 605 of the Federal Communications Act (47 U.S.C.A. § 605), as not proscribing the listening in on an extension phone by a detective where one party consented thereto. Section 605 declares: . . . no person not being authorized by the sender shall inter- cept any communication. . . . NEW MARITIME RULES Also of interest is the fact that the Federal Maritime Commission has issued new rules which require ocean freight forwarders to disclose shippers' names on shipping documents and to pay to the carrier any advances received from their principals within seven days after receipt or five days after the carrier departs. Under this ruling a forwarder's rates of compensation must be included in tariffs filed by the carriers and their conferences. See Amendment 10, General Order 4, Federal Maritime Commission, October 19, 1966. PRODUCT LIABILITY DEVELOPMENTS Two product liability cases are of interest. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court allowed to stand a judg- ment in favor of a truck owner who continued to use the truck after learning of possible defects in the accelerator and front wheel mechanisms. Because the dealer had not paid attention to the buyer's complaints, the Court said that the buyer was lulled into a sense of security and as a matter of law would not be held to have acted unreasonably in operating the vehicle after knowledge that it might be defective. Ferraro v. Ford Motor Company, Pennsylvania Supreme Court, 223 A. 2d. 746 (1966). In another product liability case, the New Jersey Superior Court said that warranty lia- bility began to run at the time of sale, so that the ex- plosion of a meter 22 years after sale would not support a warranty action. More important, the Court applied the same rule for the accrual of a cause of action based on strict liability in tort even though it stated for a simple negligence action the statute would run from the time of injury. Rosenau v. New Brunswick, New Jersey Superior Court, 224 A. 2d. 689 (1966).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most