Legal Opinion
Melhorn v. Amrep Corporation
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Decided April 19, 1974No. Civ. 73-264PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
HERMAN, District Judge.
The defendants’ motion for summary judgment requires resolution of the narrow issue of equitable estoppel. Plaintiffs’ cause of action is founded upon the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq. The defendants have moved for summary judgment on the ground that the statute of limitations bars the action. Plaintiffs, both in oral argument and by briefs, do not dispute that the relevant time limitation had indeed passed. 1 Instead, plaintiffs narrowed the issue further by invoking the doctrine of equitable estoppel.
The…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Glus v. Brooklyn Eastern District TerminalSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Schroeder v. YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Michael J. Burke v. Gateway Clipper, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
- Bergeron v. MansourCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1945
- De Luca v. Atlantic Refining Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Van Buskirk v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- Robert Bomba and Annamarie P. Bomba v. W. L. Belvidere, Inc., a General Partner Doing Business as Candlewick Lakes Associates, a PartnershipCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1978
- Adair v. Hunt International Resources Corp.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1981
- Leo A. Lukenas and Geraldine R. Lukenas, Etc., on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Bryce's Mountain Resort, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1976
- Van Buskirk v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.