Legal Opinion

American Metal Forming Corp. v. Pittman

District Court, D. Maryland

Decided January 6, 1992No. Civ. A. HAR 91-612PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

HARGROVE, District Judge.

The Court has conducted a bench trial in the above-referenced case. Pursuant to agreement between the parties, trial by jury has been waived as to those counts permitting trial by jury. Plaintiffs, American Metal Forming Corporation (“American”), and Roger Schlossberg, Trustee of the assets of the estate of Pittcon Industries, Inc., have brought this action to recover money damages and to obtain equitable relief as a result of actions allegedly taken by David Pittman, Jr. and Patrice Kelley Pittman (“the Pittmans”).

I

David Pittman (“Pittman”) was the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Sard v. HardyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1977
  2. Higgins v. BarnesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1987
  3. Wimmer v. WimmerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1980
  4. Faraclas v. City Vending Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1963
  5. Sard v. HardyCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1976

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. American Metal Forming Corporation Roger Schlossberg, Trustee v. W. David Pittman, and Patrice Kelley PittmanCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1995
  2. Pittman v. American Metal Forming Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
  3. Independent Distributors, Inc. v. KatzCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API