TRAVELERS INSURANCE CO.

v.

WILKINS

Citator

Cited By

• Ohio Hoist Mfg. Co. v. LiROCCHI, 490 F.2d 105 (6th Cir. 1974)
  …refusing permission to amend are not on point, since they center on a party’s refusal or failure to amend its complaint after a district court has given it the opportunity to do so. See Sharp v. Barnhart, 117 F. 2d 604 (7th Cir. 1941), cert, denied, 313 U.S. 576, 61 S.Ct. 1099, 85 L.Ed. 1533 (where “good faith on the part of the moving parties is lacking,” 117 F. 2d at 607); Joy v. Hague, 175 F. 2d 395 (1st Cir. 1949) (where the parties “refused to amend as the District Court invited them to do,” 175 F. 2d…
• Price Vacuum Stores, Inc. v. Admiral Corp., 223 F.2d 269 (C.C.P.A. 1955)
  …v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 2 Cir., 60 F. 2d 734, certiorari denied 287 U.S. 647, 53 S.Ct. 93, 77 L.Ed. 559. The purpose of pleadings is to narrow the issue to be tried. Sharp v. Barnhart, 7 Cir., 117 F. 2d 604, certiorari denied Canterbury v. Barnhart, 313 U.S. 576, 61 S.Ct. 1099, 85. L.Ed. 1533. Petitioner has accomplished neither of these by his pleadings. [*273] We again refer to recital 14, supra, of appellant’s petition. It can be clearly seen that there is • no direct allegation therein that Admiral Corp…