Case Name: BARROM et al. v. ROUX LABORATORIES, Inc., et al.
Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1942-10-01
Citations: 3 F.R.D. 175
Docket Number: 
Parties: BARROM et al. v. ROUX LABORATORIES, Inc., et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Rules Decisions
Volume: 3
Pages: 175–175

Head Matter:
BARROM et al. v. ROUX LABORATORIES, Inc., et al.
District Court, S. D. New York.
Oct. 1, 1942.
Abraham D. Shackton, of New York City, for plaintiffs.
Glenney, Mathews & Hampton, of New York City, (Walter L. Glenney, of New York City, of counsel), for defendants.

Opinion:
COXE, District Judge.
It cannot be said at this time that the challenged allegations of the complaint have no bearing on the subject matter of the action. That is a question which should properly be left to the trial judge to determine when evidence is offered. Motions to strike are not favored, and I cannot see that the defendants will in any way be prejudiced by allowing the allegations to stand.
The motion of the defendants to strike is denied.