Legal Opinion
Thierfeld v. Postman's Fifth Avenue Corporation
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided February 11, 1941PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CONGER, District Judge.
Plaintiff has made two motions, one to strike out certain denials as sham, and the other to strike out affirmative defenses and a counterclaim from the answer.
Defendants urge that these motions are not timely, and must be denied. The contention is that, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 12(f), 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, the motion must be “made” within 20 days after the service of the pleading to which it is addressed, and that “made” means actually presented to the court. I do not agree with defendants. Rule 12(a), F.R.C.P. provides that…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Armstrong Paint & Varnish Works v. Nu-Enamel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Saxlehner v. Eisner & Mendelson Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Good Health Dairy Products Corp. v. EmeryNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
- Rudd v. . CornellNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- Glen & Hall Manufacturing Co. v. HallCommission of Appeals · 1874
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Keohane v. Swarco, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1963
- E. J. Korvette Co. v. Parker Pen Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1955
- Sastre v. Cabrera RaldirisSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1953
- McKesson and Robbins, Inc. v. Charles Pfizer & Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1964
- Societe Comptoir De L'Industrie Cotonniere v. Alexander's Department Stores, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1961
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.