Legal Opinion

Reed v. General Implement Export Corp.

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided April 27, 1949No. Civ. No. 26062PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JONES, Chief Judge.

This is an action upon a “verbal contract” assume the word “verbal” as used ln these Pleadlnffs means “oral”)

Defendant has filed a motion for a more definite statement, under Rule 12(e), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A., setting forth the names of the person *183or persons with whom plaintiff entered into the alleged oral contract and the time and place of such agreement.

Plaintiff has filed no brief in opposition to the motion.

The motion is well taken and should be sustained. An oral contract, by its very nature, requires specific identification in pleading as to…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Sky Technology Partners, LLC v. Midwest Research InstituteDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2000
  2. Watkins v. OMNI LIFE SCIENCE, INC.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2010
  3. Marquardt-Glenn Corp. v. Lumelite Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1951
  4. Hartman Electrical Mfg. Co. v. Prime Mfg. Co.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1949

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

Powered by the Exa API