This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Identiseal (P) sued Positive (D) for fraud. P alleged that D represented to P that it was successful in the promotion of its products and that in fact, D was not successful. This fraud-induced P to invest $15,000 in D's products. The district court ruled that the pretrial work necessary to efficiently try the case had not been done and that the case was dismissed for want of prosecution. The court then stayed the order if P conducted specified discovery by a certain date. P objected, and the action was eventually dismissed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.