Legal Opinion
James Burrows, Jr. v. Core-Mark International, Inc Richard S. Dietal, Defendants/third-Party v. Fleet Maintenance, Inc. Third-Party
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided May 10, 1995No. 93-35569PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
54 F.3d 785
NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
James BURROWS, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
CORE-MARK INTERNATIONAL, INC; Richard S. Dietal,
Defendants/Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellants.
v.
FLEET MAINTENANCE, INC. Third-Party Defendant-Appellee.
No. 93-35569.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Jan. 12, 1995.
Decided May 10, 1995.
1
Before: PREGERSON and…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- TXO Production Corp. v. Alliance Resources Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Honda Motor Co. v. ObergSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- United States v. Brent Eugene Smith, United States of America v. Roberto Osegueya Martinez, United States of America v. Richard Leroy Popp, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Diane MILLER and Pamela Lewis, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. FAIRCHILD INDUSTRIES, INC., a Maryland Corporation, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- ARCH CHEMICALS, INC. v. Radiator Specialty Co.District Court, D. Oregon · 2010