Legal Opinion

Heintz & Co. v. Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided December 7, 1961No. Civ. A. No. 29951PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LUONGO, District Judge.

Before the Court for consideration are motions of the third party defendants, *145Donald M. Kerr, Donald M. Kerr, Inc. and Suburban Marketers, Inc.(1) to dismiss the third party complaint under Fed.Rules Civ.Proc., Rule 12(b) 28 U.S.C.A., and(2) for a more definite statement under Rule 12(e).

The original complaint was instituted by Heintz & Co., Inc. against the defendant, Provident Tradesmens Bank and Trust Company (Bank), alleging a negligent failure on the part of Bank to observe “accepted banking practices” in its dealings with Donald M. Kerr, plaintiff’s Philadelphia…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Texas Water Supply Corp. v. Reconstruction Finance Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1953
  2. Fedorchak v. WardDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1955
  3. O'Malley v. Wyoming Nat. BankDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1954
  4. Pacific Fire Insurance v. DunmireDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1952
  5. Quilty v. United Fruit Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1946

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Carroll Ex Rel. Carroll v. Fort James Corp. Ex Rel. Crown Zellerbach Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2006
  2. Hester v. BarnettMissouri Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. General Accident Insurance v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1984
  4. Toberman v. CopasDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1992
  5. Altman v. Central of Georgia Railway CompanyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1965

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API