Donald L. Mains and Joyce G. Mains v. United States of America, F. E. Gooding v. United States (1975)

The trial court can treat the pretrial order as amended by the consent of the parties See Mains v. United States, 508 F.2d 1251, 1259 (6th Cir.1975); Bucky v. Sebo, 208 F.2d 304, 305 (2d Cir.1953).

See, e.g., Perfection-Cobey Co. v. City Tank Corp., 597 F.2d 419, 420-21 (4th Cir. 1979); Investment Service Co. v. Allied Equities Corp., 519 F.2d 508, 511 (9th Cir. 1975); Mains v. United States, 508 F.2d 1251, 1258-60 (6th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 981 , 99 S.Ct. 569 , 58 L.Ed.2d 652 (1978); Wallin v. Fuller, 476 F.2d 1204, 1208-11 (5th Cir. 1973); Deakyne v. Commissioners of Lewes, 416 F.2d 290 , 297 n. 12 (3d Cir. 1969); Monod v. Futura, Inc., 415 F.2d 1170, 11…

See, e.g., Perfection-Cobey Co. v. City Tank Corp., 597 F.2d 419, 420-21 (4th Cir. 1979); Investment Service Co. v. Allied Equities Corp., 519 F.2d 508, 511 (9th Cir. 1975); Mains v. United States, 508 F.2d 1251, 1258-60 (6th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 981 , 99 S.Ct. 569 , 58 L.Ed.2d 652 (1978); Wallin v. Fuller, 476 F.2d 1204, 1208-11 (5th Cir. 1973); Deakyne v. Commissioners of Lewes, 416 F.2d 290 , 297 n. 12 (3d Cir. 1969); Monod v. Futura, Inc., 415 F.2d 1170, 11…

See also Perfection-Cobey Co. v. City Tank Corp., 597 F.2d 419, 420-21 (4th Cir.) (where parties actually litigate without objection issues not raised in the pretrial order, little reason exists for enforcing pretrial order); Mains v. United States, 508 F.2d 1251, 1259 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 981 , 99 S.Ct. 569 , 58 L.Ed.2d 652 ; Monod v. Futura, Inc., 415 F.2d 1170, 1173-74 (10th Cir.); Bucky v. Sebo, 208 F.2d 304, 305 (2d Cir.). 58 Likewise we cannot agree that …

See also Perfection-Cobey Co. v. City Tank Corp., 597 F.2d 419, 420-21 (4th Cir.) (where parties actually litigate without objection issues not raised in the pretrial order, little reason exists for enforcing pretrial order); Mains v. United States, 508 F.2d 1251, 1259 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 981 ,99 S. Ct.. 569, 58 L.Ed.2d 652 ; Monod v. Futura, Inc., 415 F.2d 1170,1173-74 (10th Cir.); Bucky v. Sebo, 208 F.2d 304, 305 (2d Cir.).

In Mains v. United States, 508 F.2d 1251, 1260 (6th Cir.1975), the court stated: "In no event would we want to hold that an otherwise valid claim for refund should be denied by a Court merely because the claimant may have also relied on inapplicable subsections of a section of the Internal Revenue Code." In de Haas v. Empire Petroleum Co., 435 F.2d 1223 , 1229 (10th Cir.1970), the court stated: "The test for allowing an amendment under Rule 15(b) to conform pleadings to issu…

There is no reason to require that this await a formal motion for summary judgment [or other formal process]. 16 Fed.R.Civ.P. 16 advisory committee's note; see also Mains v. United States, 508 F.2d 1251, 1259 (6th Cir.1975) ("One of the purposes which the pretrial conference serves is to expedite disposition of cases by simplifying the issues and eliminating surprise."); In re Control Data Corporation Securities Litigation, 933 F.2d 616, 621 (8th Cir.1991) ("Rule 16(c)(1) di…

There is no reason to require that this await a formal motion for summary judgment [or other formal process], Fed.R.Civ.P. 16 advisory committee’s note; see also Mains v. United States, 508 F.2d 1251, 1259 (6th Cir.1975) (“One of the purposes which the pretrial conference serves is to expedite disposition of cases by simplifying the issues and eliminating surprise.”); In re Control Data Corporation Securities Litigation, 933 F.2d 616, 621 (8th Cir.1991) (“Rule 16(c)(1) direc…

See, e.g., Mains v. United States, 508 F.2d 1251 (6th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 981 , 99 S.Ct. 569 , 58 L.Ed.2d 652 (1978).

See Mains v. United States, 508 F.2d 1251, 1259 (6th Cir. 1975); Bucky v. Sebo, 208 F.2d 304, 305 (2d Cir. 1953).

See Mains v. United States, 508 F.2d 1251 ' (6th Cir.1975); 3 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 15.13[1] (1983).