United States v. Pennsylvania Salt Mfg. Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
DICKINSON, District Judge.
There being the divergence of views between counsel and ourselves, later referred to, we have thought it well to file now this expression of our own, granting to counsel leave to file requests for the findings of fact, which will base the conclusions of law which they may further request to be found. This will enable them to get the cause, as they view it, upon the record. Because of this difference with counsel, we have made the statement of our views of greater length than we would otherwise deem necessary.
The Pre-Lis Pact Situation.
We have incorporated in this…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Black v. American International Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
- Tinicum Fishing Co. v. CarterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1869
- United States v. Banister Realty Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York · 1907
- Braisted v. DentonDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1902
- Wainwright v. McCulloughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1870
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- HSP Gaming, L.P. v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
- Oil City Sand & Gravel Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1959
- Rose v. Mitsubishi International Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1976
- Construction Along Delaware & Schuylkill Rivers, Pennsylvania Office of the Attorney General1978
- Allen v. DiazDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2023
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.