Edward J. DeBartolo Corp. v. Coopers & Lybrand
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ZIEGLER, Chief Judge.
Pending before the court are the motions of defendants, Coopers & Lybrand, a nationwide accounting firm, and a certified class of partners and principles of the firm (hereinafter “Coopers”), for judgment notwithstanding the verdict of the jury on the issue of liability, and for a new trial. At the outset, we must address the argument of the prevailing plaintiffs, including the DeBartolo 1 and Grove Associates Plaintiffs 2 (collectively, the “DeBartolo Plaintiffs”), that we should defer consideration of the pending motions until the damages phase of the trial is…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Herman & MacLean v. HuddlestonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Liberty Mutual Insurance v. WetzelSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Blackie v. BarrackCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,853 John Schlick v. Penn-Dixie Cement CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1974
- Gibbs v. ErnstSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- McCabe v. Ernst & Young, LLPCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
- Goldstein v. MilesCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2004
- Lightning Litho, Inc. v. Danka Industries, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2002
- In Re Cigna Corp. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
- EP Medsystems, Inc. v. Echocath, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1998
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.