Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

25 F. Supp. 412

Schmidt v. Going

U.S. District Court

Decided November 3, 1938

U.S. District Court · decided 1938-11-03

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1938-11-03

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1963

201938194019501960decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

REEVES, District Judge.

¶1This is a suit for personal injuries accruing to plaintiff in an automobile collision. The petition is in three counts. Plaintiff seeks compensation for her own injuries in the first count; compensation for the death of her husband in the second count, and compensation for the death of her daughter upon whom she depended for support on the third count. The petition is commendably brief.

¶2In relation to the cause of the collision, plaintiff averred: “Said automobiles, by and through the negligence of defendants were caused to collide violently, injuring plaintiff severely”, etc.

¶3This averment was repeated by reference in the succeeding counts.

¶4The defendants, by their motion for a more definite statement, ask for the following: (a) In what manner the defendants *413were negligent; (b) the age of plaintiff’s daughter, Dulcie, when she was killed.

¶5By paragraph (e) of Rule 12 of the New Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c: “A party may move for a more definite statement or for a bill of particulars of any matter which is not averred with sufficient definiteness or particularity to enable him properly to prepare his responsive pleading or to prepare for trial.”

¶6In this case the defendants have complied with the provisions of this rule by pointing out “the details desired.” In preparation for trial, and to enable the defendants properly to prepare their responsive pleadings, they are entitled to the “details desired” thus pointed out.

¶7The plaintiff may, in a supplemental pleading, specify the negligent acts which caused the collision, and in like manner, tell the age of her deceased daughter. This can all be done in a few words.

¶8Defendants’ motion will therefore be granted. It is so ordered.

¶9Plaintiff will be given ten days within which to file amendment.

/25/fsupp/412 · .json · Public domain