Reed v. Swift & Co.
District Court, W.D. Missouri
1Opinion of the Court
REEVES, Chief Judge.
This case has been before the court for a long time. Sundry motions have been heretofore filed and decided by the court. Under the authorities the plaintiff was required so to amend her complaint as to make it sound in tort and not in contract. D.C., 14 F.R.D. 145. This has been done.
Plaintiff’s amended complaint, however, asserts that she was furnished deleterious substance known as “Boxcar Laundry Powder”, and that it was manufactured by the defendant for the use to which she put it. The pertinent averments of the complaint are that such substance “contained inherent…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Thompson v. Farmers Exchange BankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1933
- National Hollow Brake Beam Co. v. BakewellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- Degener v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1937
- Harrington v. DennyDistrict Court, W.D. Missouri · 1933
- Leeper v. National Lead Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 1941
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.