Legal Opinion

Arochem International, Inc., Arochem Corporation and William R. Harris v. Harold W. Buirkle

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided June 30, 1992No. 413, Docket 91-7641PublishedCited by 100 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WINTER, Circuit Judge:

Appellants AroChem International, Inc., AroChem Corporation (collectively “Aro-Chem”), and William R. Harris brought the instant matter against Harold Buirkle for defamation and for tortious interference with a contractual and commercial relationship. A jury trial commenced, and, at the close of the plaintiffs’ main case, Judge Stanton directed a verdict in favor of Buir-kle. He held that California law governed and that Buirkle’s allegedly defamatory statements were privileged. 767 F.Supp. 1243. Additionally, Judge Stanton held that Harris and AroChem had failed to…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
  2. Babcock v. JacksonNew York Court of Appeals · 1963
  3. Silberg v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Petyan v. EllisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
  5. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Bear Stearns & Co.California Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by100 opinions

  1. Sandra Jackson v. BellSouth TelecommunicationsCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2004
  2. Curley v. AMR Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
  3. Let W. Lee v. Bankers Trust CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
  4. Ground Zero Museum Workshop v. WilsonDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2011
  5. Krock v. LipsayCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996

95 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