Hancotte v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
BECHTLE, District Judge.
Presently before the Court is defendant’s motion for joinder of a partially subrogated insurance carrier on the grounds that the carrier is the real party in interest, is a necessary party whose joinder is feasible, and is a party whose joinder is appropriate *846in the interests of justice. For the reasons set forth herein, the motion will be denied.
This is an action wherein plaintiffs Daniel and Carolyn Hancotte seek to recover $271,-843.55 in damages incurred as a result of a fire allegedly caused by a defective water softener purchased from the defendant,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- White Hall Building Corp. v. Profexray Division of Litton Industries, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1974
- Pace v. General Electric Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1972
- Stouffer Corp. v. Dow Chemical Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1980
- Ledford v. Central Medical Pavilion, Inc.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1981
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Municipality of Anchorage v. Baugh Construction & Engineering Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 1986
- Allied Fire & Safety Equipment Co. v. Dick Enterprises, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
- Prosperity Realty, Inc. v. Haco-CanonDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1989
- Agri-Mark, Inc. v. Niro, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2000
- Acme Markets, Inc. v. Shaffer Trucking, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1984
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.