Trebuhs Realty Co. v. News Syndicate Co.

S.D. New York

Trebuhs Realty Co. v. News Syndicate Co.

12 F.R.D. 110, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3495, 1951 Trade Cas. (CCH) 62,951

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York

DecidedNovember 23, 1951

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 12 F.R.D. 110 (Trebuhs Realty Co. v. News Syndicate Co.) 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

Trebuhs Realty Co. v. News Syndicate Co., 12 F.R.D. 110, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3495, 1951 Trade Cas. (CCH) 62,951 (S.D.N.Y. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

SUGARMAN, District Judge.

Plaintiffs (eight corporations operating fifteen “legitimate theatres” in the City of New York) seek to restrain the alleged violation by defendants (publishers of seven leading newspapers in the City of New York) of § 1 of the Sherman AntiTrust Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1, and §§ 4 and 16 of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act, 15 U.S. C.A. §§ 15 and 26. All defendants, relying in their briefs on Rules 10(b) and 12(e), Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. 28 U.S.C.A. meet the complaint by a joint motion “to compel separate statements of claims”.

A pleading should contain a short and plain statement of the claim¹, and be simple, concise and direct² . A complaint which meets these requirements is sufficient except where it “ * * * is so vague or ambiguous that a party cannot reasonably be required to frame a responsive pleading $ ’ * if ” 3

Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the function of a complaint is to afford fair notice to the adversary of the nature and basis of the claim asserted and a general indication of the type of litigation involved⁴.

The instant complaint meets that test. It states in essence that the defendants have conspired, in violation of the anti-trust statutes, to deny the plaintiffs as theatre operators the advantages, accorded to others who produce plays, of a. scale of rates which becomes lower as the volume of amusement advertising increases. It gives to the defendants fair notice of the nature and basis of the claim asserted and a general indication of the type of litigation involved.

Ample instrumentalities are afforded the defendants under Part V, F.R.Civ.P., to inform themselves in greater detail concerning the allegations of the complaint.⁵

[112]*112In arriving at this determination, the complaint alone was considered and no attention given to the affidavit of Lee Shubert, submitted in opposition to the motion.

Motion denied.

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

SUGARMAN, District Judge.

Plaintiffs (eight corporations operating fifteen “legitimate theatres” in the City of New York) seek to restrain the alleged violation by defendants (publishers of seven leading newspapers in the City of New York) of § 1 of the Sherman AntiTrust Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1, and §§ 4 and 16 of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act, 15 U.S. C.A. §§ 15 and 26. All defendants, relying in their briefs on Rules 10(b) and 12(e), Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. 28 U.S.C.A. meet the complaint by a joint motion “to compel separate statements of claims”.

A pleading should contain a short and plain statement of the claim¹, and be simple, concise and direct² . A complaint which meets these requirements is sufficient except where it “ * * * is so vague or ambiguous that a party cannot reasonably be required to frame a responsive pleading $ ’ * if ” 3

Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the function of a complaint is to afford fair notice to the adversary of the nature and basis of the claim asserted and a general indication of the type of litigation involved⁴.

The instant complaint meets that test. It states in essence that the defendants have conspired, in violation of the anti-trust statutes, to deny the plaintiffs as theatre operators the advantages, accorded to others who produce plays, of a. scale of rates which becomes lower as the volume of amusement advertising increases. It gives to the defendants fair notice of the nature and basis of the claim asserted and a general indication of the type of litigation involved.

Ample instrumentalities are afforded the defendants under Part V, F.R.Civ.P., to inform themselves in greater detail concerning the allegations of the complaint.⁵

[112]*112In arriving at this determination, the complaint alone was considered and no attention given to the affidavit of Lee Shubert, submitted in opposition to the motion.

Motion denied.

Sergio Bautista Miguel Rodriguez Jose Soto Manuel Fernandez Alice Farnham Alfredo Figueroa Jose Luis Alejo Mario Mejia Guadalupe Cedillo Hector Reyes Marcos Martinez Roberto Gutierrez Leopoldo Cervantes David Salas Marcos Ortega Jorge Flores Juan Magana Martin Jimenez Jose Cuevas Miguel De La Torre Jorge Del Valle Librado Cruz Vicente Cedillo Manuel Alvarez Geronimo Limon Roberto Rodriguez Rafael Abarca Salvador Rodarte John Escobar Raul Sandoval Rosendo Orozco Israel Pacheco Manuel Rosales Jorge Alberto Rosales Mauro Munguia Carlos Jimenez Joaquin Villeges Bernard Russell Ramon Hernandez Arnulfo Leon v. Los Angeles County Music Center Operating Company R.A. Music, Inc. Family Restaurants, Sergio Bautista Miguel Rodriguez Jose Soto Manuel Fernandez Alice Farnham Alfredo Figueroa Jose Luis Alejo Mario Mejia Guadalupe Cedillo Hector Reyes Marcos Martinez Roberto Gutierrez Leopoldo Cervantes David Salas Marcos Ortega Jorge Flores Juan Magana Martin Jimenez Jose Cuevas Miguel De La Torre Jorge Del Valle Librado Cruz Vicente Cedillo Manuel Alvarez Geronimo Limon Roberto Rodriguez Rafael Abarca Salvador Rodarte John Escobar Raul Sandoval Rosendo Orozco Israel Pacheco Manuel Rosales Jorge Alberto Rosales Mauro Munguia Carlos Jimenez Joaquin Villeges Bernard Russell Ramon Hernandez Arnulfo Leon, Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross-Appellees v. Los Angeles County Music Center Operating Company R.A. Music, Inc., Defendants-Appellees-Cross-Appellants, and Family Restaurants

216 F.3d 837 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)

Bautista v. Los Angeles County

216 F.3d 837 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)

Plateau, Inc. v. Warren

455 P.2d 184 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 F.R.D. 110, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3495, 1951 Trade Cas. (CCH) 62,951, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trebuhs-realty-co-v-news-syndicate-co-nysd-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack