Legal Opinion

Guzewicz v. Eberle

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided February 4, 1997No. Civil Action 96-4791, 96-7740PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

VANARTSDALEN, Senior District Judge.

Defendants have moved to disqualify the law firm of Blank, Rome, Comisky and McCauley (Blank Rome) from representing the plaintiffs in the two above captioned consolidated civil actions pending in this court. An evidentiary hearing and oral argument was held on the motion on December 18, 1996. The parties filed extensive briefs both before and after the hearing. Upon consideration of all the submissions of record, the motion to disqualify Blank Rome will be denied.

Alexander B. Stein, Esq. a partner in the Blank Rome law firm has for many…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Maritrans GP Inc. v. Pepper, Hamilton & ScheetzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. City of Kalamazoo v. Michigan Disposal ServiceDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2001
  2. Hybrid Kinetic Automotive Holdings, Inc. v. Hybrid Kinetic Automotive Corp.District Court, N.D. Mississippi · 2009
  3. North American Deed Co. v. Joseph (In Re North American Deed Co.)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Nevada · 2005
  4. Hkah. v. Hkac.District Court, N.D. Mississippi · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API