From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Russ v. Baltimore & O.R. Co.

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Feb 20, 1951
11 F.R.D. 298 (N.D. Ohio 1951)

Opinion

         Action by Ethel Russ, administratrix of estate of John Russ, against the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company. The defendant moved for a more definite statement. The District Court, Jones, Chief Judge, held that statement in complaint that plaintiff's decedent was engaged in his regular employment as a fireman when he was caused to fall beneath wheels of defendant's locomotive because of defendant's negligence conformed to requirement of a short and plain statement of the claim as found in federal rules and if defendant felt it could not properly deny such an allegation, it could state that it was without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to truth of averments, and such statements would have effect of a denial and any information desired then could be obtained by use of the discovery rules.

         Defendant's motion for a more definite statement denied.

          Parker Fulton, Charles A. Baker, Cleveland, Ohio, Edward Lane Williams, Youngstown, Ohio, for plaintiff.

          Baker, Hostetler & Patterson and Dwight B. Buss, all of Cleveland, Ohio, for defendant.


          JONES, Chief Judge.

         Motion for a more definite statement.

         Plaintiff in the complaint merely states that while her decedent was engaged in his regular employment as a fireman he was caused to fall beneath the wheels of defendant's locomotive, because of defendant's negligence.

         This statement of the accident conforms to the requirement of a short and plain statement of the claim as found in Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. rule 8, 28 U.S.C.A. If defendant feels it cannot properly deny such an allegation, it may state that it is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averment, and such statement will have the effect of a denial. Any information desired then can be obtained by use of the discovery rules.

         Motion denied.


Summaries of

Russ v. Baltimore & O.R. Co.

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division
Feb 20, 1951
11 F.R.D. 298 (N.D. Ohio 1951)
Case details for

Russ v. Baltimore & O.R. Co.

Case Details

Full title:RUSS v. BALTIMORE & O. R. CO.

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division

Date published: Feb 20, 1951

Citations

11 F.R.D. 298 (N.D. Ohio 1951)

Citing Cases

McBeath v. Pierce

It is also fairly reflective of the attitude of the district courts of the United States generally, in…