Barrom v. Roux Laboratories, Inc.

S.D. New York

Barrom v. Roux Laboratories, Inc.

3 F.R.D. 175, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1826

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York

DecidedOctober 1, 1942

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 3 F.R.D. 175 (Barrom v. Roux Laboratories, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barrom v. Roux Laboratories, Inc., 3 F.R.D. 175, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1826 (S.D.N.Y. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

COXE, District Judge.

It cannot be said at this time that the challenged allegations of the complaint have no bearing on the subject matter of the action. That is a question which should properly be left to the trial judge to determine when evidence is offered. Motions to strike are not favored, and I cannot see that the defendants will in any way be prejudiced by allowing the allegations to stand.

The motion of the defendants to strike is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

COXE, District Judge.

It cannot be said at this time that the challenged allegations of the complaint have no bearing on the subject matter of the action. That is a question which should properly be left to the trial judge to determine when evidence is offered. Motions to strike are not favored, and I cannot see that the defendants will in any way be prejudiced by allowing the allegations to stand.

The motion of the defendants to strike is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 F.R.D. 175, 1942 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1826, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barrom-v-roux-laboratories-inc-nysd-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack