Legal Opinion
Ayoub v. Helm's Express, Inc.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided June 17, 1969No. Civ. A. 68-1418PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WEBER, District Judge.
Plaintiff moves to amend his complaint to include a cause of action against a third-party defendant who was brought on the record by the original defendant. No diversity of citizenship exists between the plaintiff and third-party defendant.
The motion will be denied for the following reasons:
1. Each of the three counts of the proposed amended complaint demands judgment for a large specific sum of money for unliquidated damages. This is surplusage and unnecessary in a federal pleading. I believe it to be a bad practice for the reasons set forth in A v. B and C v. D,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Olivieri v. AdamsDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1968
- Buresch v. American LaFranceDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1968
- Palumbo v. Western Maryland Railway CompanyDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1967
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- United States v. Shell Oil Co.District Court, D. Colorado · 1985
- Kenrose Mfg. Co., Inc., a New York Corporation v. Fred Whitaker Company, Inc. v. Kilodyne, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1972
- Curtis Fawvor v. Texaco, Inc., Defendant-Third-Party v. Foster Wheeler Corporation, Third-Party B & B Insulation, Inc., Defendant-Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1977
- Home Insurance v. Ballenger Corp.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 1977
- Schwab v. Erie Lackawanna Railroad CompanyDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1969
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.