Case Name: HINDLEMAN v. SPECIALTY SALESMAN MAGAZINE, Inc., et al.
Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1940-01-26
Citations: 1 F.R.D. 278
Docket Number: No. 738
Parties: HINDLEMAN v. SPECIALTY SALESMAN MAGAZINE, Inc., et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Rules Decisions
Volume: 1
Pages: 278–279

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

Opinion:
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. fol lowing 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.