Legal Opinion

Bartholomew v. Fischl

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided December 21, 1981No. Civ. A. 81-3687PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

TROUTMAN, District Judge.

A dispute which arose between plaintiff, the executive director of the Bicity Health Bureau (Bureau), and defendants, the City of Allentown and Frank Fischl, a city official, regarding the propriety of fluoridating the drinking water culminated in a “retaliatory, protracted, public dialogue, including defamatory accusations” leveled at plaintiff by defendants whose purpose was to “destroy [plaintiff’s] career in public health”. Plaintiff contends that defendant’s “retaliatory campaign” included false charges of “immorality or dishonesty”, cost…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Paul v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Griffin v. BreckenridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  5. Bishop v. WoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Eaby v. RichmondDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1983
  2. Petrone v. City of ReadingDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1982
  3. Skrocki v. CaltabianoDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1983
  4. D.W. Realty, Inc. v. Harford Mutual InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1983
  5. Logical Minicomputers of Erie, Inc. v. FoxDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1985

1 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