Burke v. Western Newspaper Union

9 F.R.D. 343, 1945 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1489
District Court, D. Massachusetts·Decided June 15, 1945·No. Civ. A. No. 3629·Published

Opinion

HEALEY, District Judge.

The crucial allegation in Paragraph 4 is “that plaintiff, by his conduct, has induced the defendant to believe that he did not work overtime, * * The defendant’s contention is that the plaintiff is thus estopped. If the plaintiff did, in fact, deceitfully induce the defendant to believe that he did not work overtime, then the plaintiff would be estopped from claiming any overtime. Mortenson v. Western Light & Telephone Co., D.C., 42 F.Supp. 319. See also George Lawley & Son Corporation v. South, 1 Cir., 140 F.2d 439, 443, 151 A.L.R. 1081.

Paragraphs 6 and 8 in reality state a compulsory counterclaim under Rule 13(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A., based on the allegations of Paragraph 4, and will be treated as such, although designated as a defense. Rule 8(c).

The plaintiff’s motion is, therefore, denied.

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

Burke v. Western Newspaper Union, 9 F.R.D. 343, 1945 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1489 (D. Mass. 1945).

9 F.R.D. 343 (Burke v. Western Newspaper Union) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mortenson v. Western Light & Telephone Co.
42 F. Supp. 319 (S.D. Iowa, 1941)
George Lawley & Son Corp. v. South
140 F.2d 439 (First Circuit, 1944)