Legal Opinion
Baum v. Union Pac. R.
District Court, W.D. Missouri
Decided October 19, 1949No. 5931PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REEVES, Chief Judge.
The complaint has been examined in the light of defendant’s motion. The defendant was justified in its motion for the reason that the plaintiff has commingled in one paragraph many sets of circumstances, all leading, however, to one purpose. There are no surplus averments and the complaint is logically drawn, but, as indicated, the facts are blended.
Paragraph (b) of Rule 10, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., directs that “all averments of claim * * * shall be made in numbered paragraphs, the contents of each of which shall be limited as far as practicable to a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Automatic Radio Mfg. Co. v. National Carbon Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1940
- Schoenberg v. Decorative Cabinet Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1939
- Coral Gables, Inc. v. SkehanDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1942
- Bockelman v. SeatonDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1944
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hambaugh v. PeoplesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1965
- Peoples v. PeoplesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1963
- Vance v. American Society of Composers, Authors & PublishersDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1952