Legal Opinion

Fidelity Funding of California v. Reinhold

District Court, E.D. New York

Decided October 22, 1997No. 95-CV-3130(ARR)(CLP)PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

ROSS, District Judge.

Defendants Michael Mendlovie, Masel Supply Company Corp. (“Masel”), United Tal-múdica! Academy of Boro Park (“UTA”) and Aron Welz (collectively referred to as the moving defendants) have moved the court for a stay of this action as a result of the recent criminal indictment of Mendlovie, Masel, and UTA among other defendants in this civil RICO case. For the following reasons, the stay is granted as to defendant Mendlovie but denied as to Masel, UTA and Welz.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff, Fidelity Funding of California, Inc. (“Fidelity”), along with its…

2Cases cited16 opinions

Landis v. North American Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
Baxter v. PalmigianoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
Spevack v. KleinSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
United States v. KordelSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
Braswell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988

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

3Cited by2 opinions

Sterling National Bank v. A-1 Hotels International, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2001
Armand Evangelista, et al. v. Late Stage Asset Management, LLC, et al.District Court, E.D. New York · 2026