Case ID: frd_1/html/0278-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WOODWARD, District Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HINDLEMAN v. SPECIALTY SALESMAN MAGAZINE, Inc., et al.
    No. 738.
    District Court, N. D. Illinois, E. D.
    Jan. 26, 1940.
   WOODWARD, District Judge.

Plaintiff moves to strike certain portions of defendants’ answer. The motion must be allowed as to Paragraphs 9(A) to 104, both inclusive. From a mere inspection of the answer it is obvious that these paragraphs, together with the voluminous exhibits accompanying the answer, is a gross violation of Rules 8(b) and (e) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c. No discussion is necessary to support this conclusion.

The court has heretofore overruled the defenses at law set up in Paragraphs 1(a) do (G), both inclusive.