Legal Opinion

Jewelcor Inc. v. Karfunkel

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided February 11, 2008No. 05-2244, 05-4121, 06-4003Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

POLLAK, District Judge.

Appellants Michael and George Kar-funkel, individually and as partners trading as M & G Equities (collectively referred to herein as “M & G”), appeal orders of the District Court denying M & G’s motion to dismiss a breach-of-lease claim brought by appellees, Jewel-cor Incorporated et. al. (“Jewelcor”), awarding judgment in favor of Jewelcor, and granting Jewelcor attorneys’ fees. The District Court had diversity jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 and this court holds jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Appellants argue that…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  3. Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  4. Ragan v. Merchants Transfer & Warehouse Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
  5. William N. Clark v. Modern Group Ltd. John F. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993

6 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