Legal Opinion

Muscianese v. United States Steel Corporation

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided February 13, 1973No. Civ. A. 69-884PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

NEWCOMER, District Judge.

In accordance with Rule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, including stipulations agreed to by all parties.

1. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under the Selective Service Act of 1967, 50 U.S.C. App. § 459(d).

2. Plaintiff resides at 15 Heiser Avenue, Trenton, New Jersey.

3. Plaintiff was initially employed by defendant, United States Steel Corporation (hereinafter called “Corporation”) on December 12, 1961, at the Fairless Hills Works at Fairless Hills,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Fishgold v. Sullivan Drydock & Repair Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Penn Mutual Life Insurance v. AustinSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  3. Hayes v. Port of SeattleSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
  4. Shell v. StrongCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1945
  5. Curtis R. Blair v. Page Aircraft Maintenance, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1972

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Goodman v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1979
  2. Kay v. KaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  3. Davis v. Alabama Power CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. Alabama · 1974
  4. Richardson v. Hamilton International Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1974
  5. Dudley v. Textron, Inc., Burkart-Randall DivisionDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1975

9 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