Legal Opinion
Minatronics Corp. v. Buchanan Ingersoll, P.C.
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County
Decided February 14, 1995No. GD92-7496PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WETTICK, J,
Plaintiff’s motion to compel the return of inadvertently produced documents is the subject of this opinion and order of court.
Minatronics Corporation’s complaint alleges that in March 1986 Minatronics retained the law firm of Buchanan Ingersoll, P.C., to obtain patent protection for a fiber optic cable personal property security system. The supervising attorney assigned to the case set December 31, 1986 as the deadline for filing the application. The attorney whom the law firm assigned to file the patent application never filed an application; however, allegedly he falsely…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- In Re Claus Von Bulow, Martha Von Bulow, by Her Next Friends Alexander Auersperg, and Annie Laurie Auersperg-Kneissl v. Claus Von BulowCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
- Duplan Corporation v. Deering Milliken, Inc.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1974
- Bowne of New York City, Inc. v. AmBase Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1993
- In Re Sealed CaseCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1989
- Mendenhall v. Barber-Greene Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1982
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. FlemingSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Carbis Walker, LLP v. Hill, Barth and King, LLCSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Murray v. Gemplus International, S.A.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2003
- NUPSON v. SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL & LEWIS, LLPDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2021
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. FlemingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.