Kuntz v. National Lead Co.

E.D. New York

Kuntz v. National Lead Co.

10 F. Supp. 282, 1935 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1664

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. New York

DecidedFebruary 14, 1935

DocketNo. 6423

StatusPublished

This text of 10 F. Supp. 282 (Kuntz v. National Lead Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kuntz v. National Lead Co., 10 F. Supp. 282, 1935 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1664 (E.D.N.Y. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

MOSCOWITZ, District Judge.

Both the plaintiff and the defendant make motions for bills of particulars.

Plaintiff is not entitled to a bill of particulars on items upon which he has the burden of proof. In item' 1 he seeks: “1. The terms, conditions, provisions and details of the alleged Code of fair competition for the lead industry, referred to in the answer herein in paragraph TO’ thereof, as subscribed by the defendant, together with all amendments and supplements thereof.”

In item 5 he seeks information which is a matter of public record, which records are as available to the plaintiff as they are to the defendant.

Motion for the plaintiff’s bill of particulars will be denied.

Items 3, 4, and 5 of defendant’s demand relate to the matter of damage alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff.

General damage alone is claimed. The plaintiff is not required to set forth items relating to elements of general damage. Duncan Co. v. Hemsley & Co., 178 App. Div. 882, 164 N. Y. S. 670.

Defendant’s motion as to items 1, 3, 4, and 5 is denied, and granted as to item 2.

Settle order on notice.

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