Universal Athletic Sales Co. v. American Gym, Recreational & Athletic Equipment Corp.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER REFUSING TO DISQUALIFY COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT
KNOX, District Judge.
In this case, wherein the proceedings were initiated by attorneys for plaintiff seeking to disqualify counsel for defendant, we have another situation where, as noted by Judge Van Artsdalen in the lower court opinion in Richardson v. Hamilton International Corp., 333 F.Supp. 1049 (E.D.Pa.1971), “different and possibly conflicting policies of the law become apparent”. On the one hand, we have the principles recently elucidated by the Court of Appeals for this Circuit in Richardson v. Hamilton International…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,675 James M. Richardson v. Hamilton International CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
- Jedwabny v. Philadelphia Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1957
- Riley v. Boynton Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Middleberg v. MiddlebergSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
- Otis & Co. v. Pennsylvania R. Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1944
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Cannon v. US Acoustics CorporationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1975
- In Re DinovaBankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Second Circuit · 1997
- Black v. State of Mo.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1980
- Kleiner v. First National BankDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1983
- Universal Athletic Sales Co. v. American Gym, Recreational & Athletic Equipment Corp.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1975
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.