Legal Opinion
United States v. Board of Harbor Commissioners
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided January 25, 1977No. Civ. A. No. 76-414PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LATCHUM, Chief Judge.
Defendants The SICO Company (“SICO”) and North American Smelting Company (“NASCO”) have moved pursuant to Rule 12(e), F.R.Civ.P., for a more definite statement on the ground that the complaint filed against them by the government is so vague and ambiguous that they are unable to frame a responsive pleading as required by Rule 7, F.R.Civ.P. In addition, a motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b), F.R.Civ.P., was filed by defendants City of Wilmington, Port of Wilmington, Board of Harbor Commissioners, and Wilmington Marine Terminal (“the City”) on the ground…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Holmberg v. ArmbrechtSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Angel v. BullingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Sola Electric Co. v. Jefferson Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Laverne v. CorningDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1970
- Lincoln Laboratories, Inc. v. Savage Laboratories, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1960
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Miller v. Correctional Medical Systems, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1992
- Hassett v. Ganz (In Re O.P.M. Leasing Services, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 1982
- Leucadia, Inc. v. Applied Extrusion Technologies, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1991
- Hayes v. City University of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1981
- Rural Water District 3 v. Owasso Utilities AuthorityDistrict Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 1979
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.