Legal Opinion
Canister Co. v. National Can Corp.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided February 20, 1951No. Civ. A. 309, 365PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LEAHY, Chief Judge.
The particular matter for decision is defendant’s motions to strike certain allegations of the amended complaints. For purposes of the question our CA 309 and 365 will be considered as one. In CA 309 it is alleged:
“Plaintiff is informed and believes, and therefore alleges, that notwithstanding defendant was fully aware of all the facts hereinbefore alleged and of the probable result to plaintiff of the breach by defendant of its agreements with plaintiff, defendant voluntarily, deliberately and maliciously breached its agreements with plaintiff, and is continuing so to do,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hornstein v. PodwitzNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
- Reiner v. North American Newspaper AllianceNew York Court of Appeals · 1932
- Keviczky v. LorberNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
- S. C. Posner Co. v. JacksonNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Friedman v. Roseth Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1946
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Applied Equipment Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1994
- Wise v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1963
- Worrie v. BozeSupreme Court of Virginia · 1956
- Dryden v. Tri-Valley GrowersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
- Daly v. NauIndiana Court of Appeals · 1975
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.