1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 152 F.Supp.
  5. 152 F.Supp. 408 (1955)
 

MARKS v. AUTOCAR COMPANY

Civ. No. 16075.

152 F.Supp. 408 (1955)

Sally MARKS, Plaintiff, and Rudolph Kruger, Clarise E. Kruger and Anna Schildkret, Intervening Plaintiffs, v. The AUTOCAR COMPANY and the White Motor Company, Defendants.

United States District Court E. D. Pennsylvania.

February 17, 1955.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Richard D. Solo, Martin Horwitz, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiff.

Thomas Raeburn White, Philadelphia, Pa., for Autocar Co.

Joseph W. Swain, Jr., Philadelphia, Pa., for White Motor Co.

KIRKPATRICK, Chief Judge.

It seems to me that the rationale of the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Central-Penn National Bank of Philadelphia v. Portner, 201 F.2d 607, as appearing in the opinion of Chief Judge Biggs, requires the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment to be denied. Under the Portner case, the genuineness of her, or her agent's, motive in abstaining from voting and in her subsequent dissent...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases