Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. American Tobacco Co.

District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Decided July 31, 1961No. Civ. A. No. 6539PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FOLLMER, District Judge.

Defendants, American Tobacco Company and P. Lorillard Company, have moved, in accordance with Rule 12(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., to strike from the Complaint as immaterial and impertinent the following :

The unnumbered paragraph immediately following Paragraph 11, which ‘■eads as follows:

“Wherefore, plaintiff demands of defendants the .sum of One Hundred Five Thousand ($105,000.00) Dollars.”

The unnumbered paragraph immediately following Paragraph 16, which reads as follows:

“Wherefore, plaintiff demands of defendants the sum of Two Hundred…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McCoy v. SilerCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1953
  2. Joyce v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  3. Stein v. MeyerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1957
  4. Mitchell v. American Tobacco CompanyDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1960
  5. Felgemaker v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1942

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. United States v. Shell Oil Co.District Court, D. Colorado · 1985
  2. OKC Corp. v. WilliamsDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 1978
  3. Ryer v. Harrisburg Kohl Bros.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1971
  4. Fiore v. Kelly Run Sanitation, Inc.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. A v. BDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1969

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API