Legal Opinion

Scervini v. Miles Laboratories, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided May 21, 1951PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LEIBELL, District Judge.

Defendant moves under Rule 12(e), Fed. Rules Civ.Proc., 28 U.S.C.A., for “a more definite statement of the nature and substance of the allegations set forth in paragraphs numbered 21 and 22” of the complaint. Rule 12(e) provides that “If a pleading to which a responsive pleading is permitted is so vague or ambiguous that a party cannot reasonably be required to frame a responsive pleading, he may move for a more definite statement before interposing his responsive pleading”.

*543Paragraphs 21 and 22, which are part of plaintiff’s second claim or cause of action, allege:

“21.…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. EMC Corp. v. Storage Technology Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1996
  2. Lynn v. ValentineDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1956
  3. Dixie Mercerizing Co. v. Triangle Thread Mills, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1955
  4. Trebuhs Realty Co. v. News Syndicate Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1951

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

Powered by the Exa API