Legal Opinion
Paparelli v. Prudential Insurance
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided December 30, 1985No. Civ. A. No. 84-1949-KPublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON MOTION FOR SANCTIONS (# 103)
ROBERT B. COLLINGS, United States Magistrate.
Judith Paparelli claims that she was injured as a result of a feature of the elevators in the Prudential Tower in Boston which allows the doors of the elevator to begin opening just prior to the point at which the elevator reaches the level of the floor at which it is to stop. The name given to this feature is called “pre-opening”. The elevators in the Prudential Tower were manufactured by the defendant Westinghouse.
On April 15, 1985, I issued an Order compelling Westinghouse to produce “all documents…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Perrignon v. Bergen Brunswig Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 1978
- Jack Haney, and Michael Haney, Who Sues by His Next Friend, Jack Haney v. Woodward & Lothrop, Inc., and Peter F. GordonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1964
- International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 1981
- Preyer v. United States Lines, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1973
- United States v. Gahagan Dredging Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1958
3Cited by29 opinions
- U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Caesars Entertainment, Inc.District Court, D. Nevada · 2006
- American Airlines, Inc. v. Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & HamptonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Detoy v. City & County of San FranciscoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2000
- King v. Pratt & WhitneyDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1995
- Riddell Sports Inc. v. BrooksDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1994
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.