Legal Opinion

Tiller v. Hobart Corp.

District Court, W.D. Virginia

Decided August 2, 1999No. 1:99CV00065PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

JONES, District Judge.

The question before the court is whether the plaintiff in this diversity product liability case has made sufficiently detailed allegations in her initial pleading in order to properly assert a claim for punitive damages or whether, on the other hand, the allegations are improperly vague and conclusory. In light of the purposes of federal pleading, I find that the claim is sufficiently alleged and deny a motion to dismiss under rule 12(b)(6).

I

The plaintiff Deanna Gail Tiller alleged in her suit papers that on March 11, 1997, while working at her job at a…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  3. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  4. Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  5. Dunbar Corp. v. LindseyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1990

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Paul v. GomezDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2000
  2. Schieszler v. Ferrum CollegeDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2002
  3. Fleming v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 1999
  4. Garvin v. Southern States Insurance Exchange Co.District Court, N.D. West Virginia · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API