Legal Opinion

Melnick v. Binenstock

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 25, 1935No. Appeal, 374PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

Melnick, appellant, transferred his property to his wife, the daughter of Joseph Binenstock, upon her agreement that it would be returned to him on demand. The parties separated and Melnick demanded the reconveyance of his property. Failing to receive it, he filed a bill in equity against his wife and her father, Binenstock, charging that the defendants had conspired to and did deceive him by false and fraudulent representation as to the prosperity and condition, as it relates to this suit, of the Pale Moon Corporation of America, and that as a result of such false representation…

2Cited by35 opinions

  1. The Aro Corporation v. Allied Witan CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1976
  2. Teodore Dorotee Autera v. Manuel Dudley Robinson, Anthony C. Autera v. Manuel Dudley RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1969
  3. Fairfax Countywide Citizens Ass'n v. County of FairfaxCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1978
  4. Cameron v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  5. Comet Casualty Co. v. SchneiderAppellate Court of Illinois · 1981

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API