Frankel v. Styer
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
KRAFT, District Judge.
This action is before us on defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s action, or, in the alternative, plaintiff’s amended complaint.
While we have no wish to appear unduly critical, we note that the amended complaint has been drawn with little regard for the Rules of Civil Procedure relating to pleadings. For example, the complaint is captioned “Complaint in Trespass.” We call attention to Fed. Rules Civ.Proc. 2, 28 U.S.C.A.: “There shall be one form of action to be known as ‘civil action’ ”. With regard to the substance of the amended complaint, it is only after…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Birch v. Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis RailwaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Estate of TaylorSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
- Crider v. MoorheadSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
3Cited by6 opinions
- DiBelardino v. Lemmon Pharmacal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
- Mary Virginia Slade, General Guardian of Robert Elkins and Mark David Brooks v. Louisiana Power and Light CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- Post v. Manitowoc Eng. Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1965
- Sacks v. CreasyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1962
- Barnard v. Pennsylvania Range Boiler Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1962
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.