Stokes v. Farnsworth
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Utah
, On motion to take from the files an amended answer, and to strike out a defense therein pleaded.
1Opinion of the Court
MABSHAIiL, District Judge.
Exceptions to defendant’s original answer were sustained. Thereafter, leave of court having been obtained, defendant filed an amended answer, setting up a new affirmative defense. The plaintiffs move to take from the files the amended answer, and also to strike out the new defense, on the grounds: (1) That it was irregularly filed, in that no special permission of the court was obtained; (2) that the new defense is impertinent; irrelevant, sham, rambling, and verbose. Was there any irregularity in the making of the amendment of which the plaintiffs can take…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Banks v. ManchesterSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Grether v. WrightCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1896
- Piercy v. SabinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- The People v. . McCumberNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Board of Supervisors of Fulton County v. Mississippi & Wabash RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1859
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pathe Exchange v. INTERNATIONAL ALLIANCE, ETC.District Court, S.D. New York · 1932
- Pathé Exchange, Inc. v. International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees & Moving Picture Machine Operators of the United States & Canada, Local No. 306District Court, S.D. New York · 1932