Legal Opinion

Rupe v. Associated Electric Co.

District Court, D. Delaware

Decided November 12, 1946No. Civil Action No. 353PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RODNEY, District Judge.

This is a motion to amend an answer under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 15(a), 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. The plaintiffs, by the complaint, seek the recovery of certain payments which they allege were made by them, by mistake, and as a consequence of certain allegedly erroneous accounting of the defendant. The original answer denied that any amount was due from the defendant to the plaintiffs or that any amount had been paid by the plaintiffs by mistake., ;

The defendant contends the amendment merely amplifies the existing defense and sets up, as…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Rucienski v. Vanadium Corp. of AmericaDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1943
  2. Forster Music Publisher, Inc. v. Fred Fisher Music Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1944

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Peterson Steels, Inc. v. SeidmonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1951
  2. Klee v. Pittsburgh & West Virginia Railway Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1958
  3. Darcy v. North Atlantic & Gulf S. S. Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1948
  4. Garrison v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1957
  5. PIC, Inc. v. Prescon Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1977

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API