Meyer v. Lavelle
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LUONGO, District Judge.
BACKGROUND
Paul E. Meyer, the pro se plaintiff in the above captioned actions, is a plumbing contractor. His default on a contract and subsequent litigation with his bonding company in the state court provide the backdrop for the two suits in this court.
Meyer’s default occurred in late 1972. Wisconsin Surety Corporation, which had issued the bond for Meyer’s performance, took over the contract and thereafter sued Meyer in the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County1 to *534recover the amounts it was required to expend to cure Meyer’s default. Meyer represented…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Pierson v. RaySupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Powell v. McCormackSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Bradley v. FisherSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- North Carolina v. RiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Ex Parte VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Aberson v. GlassmanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1976
- Meyer v. CurranDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1975
- General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Olympic Gardens, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1979
- Hamilton v. EdellDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1975
- Meyer v. LavelleDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1975
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.