Legal Opinion

Kirby v. Turner-Day & Woolworth Handle Co.

District Court, E.D. Tennessee

Decided June 29, 1943No. 521PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DARR, District Judge.

By motion the plaintiff prays for an order requiring the defendant to make its answer more specific, or to file a bill of particulars, in two respects.(1) The third paragraph of the complaint charges that the plaintiff’s intestate was struck and killed by an automobile operated on behalf of the defendant by its employe, Skeen Thorne, in the course of his employment.

In response to this averment the answer admits that the car belonged to the defendant and was being operated by Skeen Thorne but neither admits or denies that Thorne was an agent of the defendant and that he…

2Cited by9 opinions

  1. Atkins v. MoyeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. Zielinski v. Philadelphia Piers, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1956
  3. Geraldine Kroger, Administratrix of the Estate of James D. Kroger, Deceased v. Owen Equipment & Erection Company, a Nebraska CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1977
  4. DeVore Brokerage Co. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1969
  5. Shinn Irrigation Equipment, Inc. v. MarchandCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1969

4 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