Legal Opinion

Bowles v. Schlamberg

District Court, N.D. California

Decided March 8, 1946No. Civil Action No. 5410PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WELSH, District Judge.

Reference is made to opinions filed in Bowles v. Flotill, D.C., 4 F.R.D. 499, and Bowles v. Sebastopol Berry Growers Association, D.C., 5 F.R.D. 178, for the views of this Court in regard to bills of particulars.

It is ordered that defendants’ motion for a bill of particulars be, and the same is hereby, granted in the following respects—

That plaintiff be required to specify:

1. The specific articles of apparel referred to as “certain articles of apparel” in lines 16 and 17, page 2 of plaintiff’s complaint ;

2. (a) The specific articles of apparel which plaintiff alleges in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bowles v. Flotill Products, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 1945
  2. Bowles v. Sebastopol Berry Growers Ass'nDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1946

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Bowles v. AlfordDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1946
  2. Malone v. City of Akron, OhioDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API