Poles, Inc. v. Estate of Beecker
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
*24MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HUYETT, District Judge.
Plaintiffs have moved for reconsideration of our order dismissing their complaint for lack of jurisdiction. Poles, Inc. v. Estate of William H. A. Beecker, 461 F.Supp. 878 (E.D.Pa.1978). Because we believe that our earlier decision was required by Thiokol Chemical Corp. v. Burlington Industries, Inc., 448 F.2d 1328 (3d Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1019, 92 S.Ct. 684, 30 L.Ed.2d 668 (1972), plaintiffs’ motion is denied.
Plaintiffs contend that our earlier decision ignores the holding and policy enunciated in Lear, Inc. v. Adkins, 395 U.S. 653, 89…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Lear, Inc. v. AdkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Thiokol Chemical Corp. v. Burlington Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
- Milprint, Inc. v. Curwood, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1977
- Crown Cork & Seal Co. v. Pennsylvania Human Relations CommissionDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1979
- Milton Roy Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1976
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.