Strout v. United Shoe Machinery Co.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
At Law. Action by Charles A. Strout, as substituted trustee of the Goddu Company, against the United Shoe Machinery Company and others. On motion to strike out amendment to special replication, and on demurrer to such replication.
1Opinion of the Court
DODGE, Circuit Judge.
The plaintiff’s writ is dated September 8, 1911. A motion to dismiss was denied, and a plea in abatement overruled, March 30, 1912. 195 Fed. 313. The declaration was amended, and a demurrer to the amended declaration overruled, January 31, 1913. 202 Fed. 602. The opinion then filed explains the nature of the case and summarizes the allegations of the amended declaration then material.
On March 4, 1913, the defendants answered the amended declaration. Besides a denial of each and every allegation, their answer contains, among others, affirmative allegations in substance as…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wood v. CarpenterSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Hardt v. HeidweyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Converse v. United Shoe Machinery Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
- Converse v. United Shoe Machinery Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Strout v. United Shoe Machinery Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Burnham Chemical Co. v. Borax Consolidated, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1948
- Foster & Kleiser Co. v. Special Site Sign Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
- Delta Theaters, Inc. v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1958
- Gaetzi v. Carling Brewing CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1962
- Curtis v. ConnlyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1920
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.