Legal Opinion
Bower v. Casanave
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided November 6, 1941PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CONGER, District Judge.
The plaintiff has moved to strike out all thirteen affirmative defenses in the answer as sham, immaterial, irrelevant, and insufficient in law, and for judgment “on the complaint”. Defendant has cross-moved for judgment on the pleadings or in the alternative to compel a reply to the affirmative defenses.
The action is based upon a judgment entered in the Municipal Court of the City of Chicago. Diversity of citizenship and the statutory amount are alleged in the complaint. It is further averred that in April, 1941, plaintiff duly commenced an action in the said Municipal…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Adam v. SaengerSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Thompson v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Roche v. McDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Grover & Baker Sewing MacHine Co. v. RadcliffeSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- National Exchange Bank of Tiffin v. WileySupreme Court of the United States · 1904
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Swarb v. LennoxDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1970
- Pankau v. First State Bank of Harvard (In Re Pankau)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 1986
- Hodes v. HodesOregon Supreme Court · 1945
- Young v. RidleyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1970
- Miners Sav. Bank of Pittston, Pa. v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1953
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.