Legal Opinion

Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. v. American Bowling & Billiard Co.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided January 5, 1943PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

COXE, District Judge.

These are motions by the plaintiff (1) to dismiss the Third separate defense of the amended answer, and (2) for a bill of particulars of various allegations of the Second and Third counterclaims of the amended answer.

The motion to dismiss the Third separate defense is denied. I think this defense is sufficient under the Morton Salt case, Morton Salt Co. v. G. S. Suppiger Co., 314 U.S. 488, 62 S.Ct. 402, 86 L.Ed. 363; as now pleaded, it meets the objection sustained by Judge Goddard with respect to a similar defense in the former pleading. 2 F.R.D. 487.

The motion for a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Morton Salt Co. v. G. S. Suppiger Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. Brunswick-Balke-Collender Co. v. American Bowling & Billiard Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1942

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Oliver Gintel, Inc. v. Koslow's, Inc.District Court, N.D. Texas · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API