From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barnett v. Euromerican Cellulose Products

Supreme Court, New York County
Dec 31, 1929
135 Misc. 675 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1929)

Opinion

December 31, 1929.

Harry T. Zucker, for the plaintiffs.

Gleason, McLanahan, Merritt Ingraham [ Walter Gordon Merritt of counsel], for moving defendants.


Motion is denied. Motion to strike out portions of a pleading as irrelevant and redundant are addressed to the sound discretion of the court. They are not favored, especially in equity actions, and will be denied unless the court can clearly see that the allegations sought to be stricken out have no possible bearing upon the subject-matter of the litigation. (See Indelli v. Lesster, 130 A.D. 548; Meyer v. Young, 49 id. 639.) The time of the moving defendants to answer or make any further motion with respect to the complaint is extended until ten days after the service of this order, with notice of entry.


Summaries of

Barnett v. Euromerican Cellulose Products

Supreme Court, New York County
Dec 31, 1929
135 Misc. 675 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1929)
Case details for

Barnett v. Euromerican Cellulose Products

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD P. BARNETT and Others, Plaintiffs, v. EUROMERICAN CELLULOSE…

Court:Supreme Court, New York County

Date published: Dec 31, 1929

Citations

135 Misc. 675 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1929)
238 N.Y.S. 371

Citing Cases

Sanchez v. Spitzka

The falsity and bad faith of the answer must clearly appear. ( Steinberg v. Levy, 139 Misc. 453; Barnett v.…

Flynn v. New York World-Telegram Corporation

The first alternative relief sought by the plaintiff's motion is for an order striking out the allegations in…