Legal Opinion
Nissim v. McNEIL CONSUMER PRODUCTS CO., INC.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 15, 1997No. Civil Action 95-3211PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
LOWELL A. REED, Jr., District Judge.
Currently before this Court is the timely post-trial motion of plaintiff Benjamin Nissim to alter or amend the judgment and enter an award of back pay damages pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), or, in the alternative, grant a new trial on the issue of damages pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(a) (Document No. 75), and response thereto. 1 For the following reasons, I will deny the motion of plaintiff.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff brought an action against defendant McNeil Consumer Products Company, Inc. (“McNeil”), pursuant to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Jaime Blum, Brij Kapur and James C. Spitsbergen, in 86-5349 v. Witco Chemical Corporation, in 86-5310Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
- Massarsky v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1983
- Portia Motter, and Lawrence Motter, H/w v. Everest & Jennings, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- Bruce Lincoln-Mercury, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation v. Universal C.I.T. Credit CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1963
- Smith v. City of ChesterDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Molski v. M.J. Cable, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Cipriani v. Lycoming County Housing AuthorityDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2001
- Rhoads v. Federal Deposit InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2003
- Marshak v. TreadwellDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1999
- United States v. WhittakerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2001
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.