Legal Opinion
Cooper v. Fidelity-Phila. Trust Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 2, 1962No. Civ. A. No. 27868PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WOOD, District Judge.
The motions under consideration are based upon three grounds: 1) the alleged causes of action set forth in the amended complaint are barred by the statute of limitations; 2) the alleged causes of action set forth in the complaint are res judicata; and 3) the complaint is so lacking in allegations of fact that it fails to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. A history of this case is necessary to the decision of these motions. The plaintiff has been unable to obtain and keep the assistance of counsel in this matter.1 Therefore, we have considered plaintiff’s…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Miller Motors, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1958
- Marshall v. Packard-Bell Co.California Court of Appeal · 1951
- Chatfield v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1939
- Miller Motors, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1957
3Cited by10 opinions
- Kach v. Hose ex rel. St. Moritz Security Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
- Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Sales, Inc. v. Avondale Shipyards, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1982
- Michael Meyers, Individually and as Representative of a Class v. Pennypack Woods Home Ownership Association and Marion A. SteinbronnCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1977
- Cesnik v. Edgewood Baptist ChurchCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1996
- Donahue v. Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1986
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.