Legal Opinion
George H. Hoffman, Administrator of the Estate of Antoinette D. Drolles, Deceased v. George E. Lenyo, M.D
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided November 5, 1970No. 18563PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
FREEDMAN, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff, administrator of the estate of the decedent, appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his action because diversity was manufactured and hence would not support the suit under our decision in McSparran v. Weist, 402 F.2d 867 (3 Cir. 1968), cert. denied sub nom. Fritzinger v. Weist, 395 U.S. 903, 89 S.Ct. 1739, 23 L.Ed.2d 217 (1969).
I
Plaintiff attacks the finding of the district court that “the sole purpose in selecting plaintiff as an administrator was to create diversity of citizenship.”
As we pointed out in McSparr an 1 and in…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McSparran v. WeistCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1968
- Corabi v. Auto Racing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1959
- Groh v. BrooksCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
- Thelma J. Law, Administratrix of the Estate of William C. Yaggi, Deceased v. John Converse, a Minor, by His Guardian, James ConverseCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969
- Siegel v. SlaneyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- George S. Krasnov v. Brendan DinanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
- Philips Electronic and Pharmaceutical Industries Corp. v. Thermal and Electronics Industries, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
- Holman v. Carpenter Technology Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1980
- Gavin v. Read CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1973
- Renner v. VitcovDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1972
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.