Legal Opinion
Pearl v. Allied Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided April 8, 1983No. Civ. A. 82-2931PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
TROUTMAN, District Judge.
Complaining that the installation of urea formaldehyde insulation in their residences has generally resulted in property damages and a diminution in the fair market value of their homes, plaintiffs, purportedly representing a class of similarly situated individuals, instituted this action seeking appropriate recompense from defendants, manufacturers of the allegedly dangerous product. The complaint also alleges that a second class of plaintiffs have or will suffer physical harm and unspecified injuries as a result of their exposure to urea…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food MacHinery & Chemical Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Clarence Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation, Nationalsurety Corporation, Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- Pennsylvania Glass Sand Corporation v. Caterpillar Tractor CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1981
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- City of Manchester v. National Gypsum Co.District Court, D. Rhode Island · 1986
- Bennett v. Mallinckrodt, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1985
- Carlough v. Amchem Products, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
- Johnson v. General Motors Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- American Protection Insurance v. McMahanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1989
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.