Legal Opinion

Rose Dyszel and Robert Dyszel, H/w, Michele Dyszel and Michael Dyszel, H/w v. Rosie Marks, Defendant/third-Party v. Tim's Auto Service Tim Doe, Third-Party Michele Dyszel, Daniel Tumolo and Leslie Tumolo, H/w v. Andrew Brogan, III

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided October 14, 1993No. 92-5289Published

1Opinion of the Court

6 F.3d 116

Rose DYSZEL and Robert Dyszel, h/w, Michele Dyszel and

Michael Dyszel, h/w, Appellants,

v.

Rosie MARKS, Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff,

v.

TIM'S AUTO SERVICE; Tim Doe, Third-Party Defendants,

Michele Dyszel, Appellant.

Daniel TUMOLO and Leslie Tumolo, h/w, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

Andrew BROGAN, III, Defendant-Appellee.

Nos. 92-5289, 92-5334.

United States Court of Appeals,

Third Circuit.

Sept. 22, 1993.

Sur Petition for Rehearing with Suggestion

for Rehearing In Banc Oct. 14, 1993.

2Cases cited44 opinions

  1. Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  2. City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  5. Plyler v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982

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

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

Powered by the Exa API