Mortensen v. Chicago, Great Western Ry. Co.

S.D. Iowa

Mortensen v. Chicago, Great Western Ry. Co.

2 F.R.D. 121, 1941 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2114

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Iowa

DecidedSeptember 13, 1941

DocketNo. 39

StatusPublished

This text of 2 F.R.D. 121 (Mortensen v. Chicago, Great Western Ry. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mortensen v. Chicago, Great Western Ry. Co., 2 F.R.D. 121, 1941 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2114 (S.D. Iowa 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

DEWEY, District Judge.

The motion is to strike two of the alleged grounds of negligence.

Rule 12 (f) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, does provide that upon motion the court may order any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter stricken from any pleading.

This gives the court a broad discretion, but the general theory of the Rules of Civil Procedure is that, inasmuch as it is only necessary to state a claim in the pleadings as against the defendant and not a cause of action, questions of what should be the grounds of negligence to be submitted to a jury should not be determined by the court until the parties have had an opportunity to investigate by discovery and otherwise what are the facts surrounding the situation concerning which the complaint is made. It would be more satisfactory, after these facts are known, to determine this question of what grounds of negligence should be submitted to a jury either at the time of the trial or at a pre-trial conference.

The motion to strike should be and the same is overruled and the defendant excepts.

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

DEWEY, District Judge.

The motion is to strike two of the alleged grounds of negligence.

Rule 12 (f) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, does provide that upon motion the court may order any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter stricken from any pleading.

This gives the court a broad discretion, but the general theory of the Rules of Civil Procedure is that, inasmuch as it is only necessary to state a claim in the pleadings as against the defendant and not a cause of action, questions of what should be the grounds of negligence to be submitted to a jury should not be determined by the court until the parties have had an opportunity to investigate by discovery and otherwise what are the facts surrounding the situation concerning which the complaint is made. It would be more satisfactory, after these facts are known, to determine this question of what grounds of negligence should be submitted to a jury either at the time of the trial or at a pre-trial conference.

The motion to strike should be and the same is overruled and the defendant excepts.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 F.R.D. 121, 1941 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2114, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mortensen-v-chicago-great-western-ry-co-iasd-1941.