Legal Opinion

G. C. S., Inc. v. David W. Murray Co.

District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania

Decided August 7, 1968No. Civ. A. No. 68-146Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

ROSENBERG, District Judge.

The defendant, David W. Murray Company, has here filed a “Motion For More Definite Statement”. It complains that the plaintiff, G.S.C., Inc., has filed a complaint which is a “rambling narration” and that it, with the amended complaint and answer to this motion, is ambiguous, inconsistent, uninformative, factually unintelligible, and it is impossible to make answer thereto, particularly as relates to affirmative defenses.

As one examines these pleadings it is apparent that they are overlong, and while this appears to be the result of the plaintiff’s desire…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Arlan G. Schaedler v. Reading Eagle Publication, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1967
  2. East Crossroads Center, Inc. v. Mellon-Stuart Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1965
  3. Lobianco v. Valley Forge Military AcademyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1963
  4. Asphaltic Enterprises, Inc. v. Baldwin-Lima-Hamilton Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1966
  5. Grafe-Weeks Corp. v. Air Products, Inc.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API