Hindleman v. Specialty Salesman Magazine, Inc.

N.D. Illinois

Hindleman v. Specialty Salesman Magazine, Inc.

1 F.R.D. 278, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1930

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois

DecidedJanuary 26, 1940

DocketNo. 738

StatusPublished

This text of 1 F.R.D. 278 (Hindleman v. Specialty Salesman Magazine, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hindleman v. Specialty Salesman Magazine, Inc., 1 F.R.D. 278, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1930 (N.D. Ill. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

WOODWARD, District Judge.

Plaintiff moves to strike certain portions of defendants’ answer. The motion must be allowed as to Paragraphs 9(A) to 104, both inclusive. From a mere inspection of the answer it is obvious that these paragraphs, together with the voluminous exhibits accompanying the answer, is a gross violation of Rules 8(b) and (e) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. fol[279]*279lowing section 723c. No discussion is necessary to support this conclusion.

The court has heretofore overruled the defenses at law set up in Paragraphs 1(a) do (G), both inclusive.

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

WOODWARD, District Judge.

Plaintiff moves to strike certain portions of defendants’ answer. The motion must be allowed as to Paragraphs 9(A) to 104, both inclusive. From a mere inspection of the answer it is obvious that these paragraphs, together with the voluminous exhibits accompanying the answer, is a gross violation of Rules 8(b) and (e) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. fol[279]*279lowing section 723c. No discussion is necessary to support this conclusion.

The court has heretofore overruled the defenses at law set up in Paragraphs 1(a) do (G), both inclusive.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 F.R.D. 278, 1940 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1930, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hindleman-v-specialty-salesman-magazine-inc-ilnd-1940.