GREITZER & LOCKS, Gene Locks and Martin Greitzer; Neil R. Peterson, Appellants,
v.
JOHNS-MANVILLE CORPORATION and Johns-Manville Sales Corporation; Raybestos-Manhatten, Inc.; Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.; Unarco Industries, Inc.; Fibreboard Corporation; H.K. Porter Company; Southern Textile Corporation; Pittsburgh Corning Corporation; The Celotex Corporation; Keene Corporation, Appellees,
United States of America, Amicus Curiae.
Virginia Asbestos Plaintiffs, Amicus Curiae.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued June 8, 1982.
Decided June 17, 1982.
Certiorari Denied November 8, 1982.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Robert C. Nusbaum, Norfolk, Va. (Hofheimer, Nusbaum, McPaul & Brenner, Norfolk, Va., on brief) for appellants.
C. Michael Montgomery, C. Grigsby Scifres, Norfolk, Va. (Seawell, Dalton, Hughes & Timms, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for Johns-Manville Corp. and Johns-Manville Sales Corp.
Archibald Wallace, III, Richmond, Va. (Albert D. Bugg, Jr., Sands, Anderson, Marks & Miller, Richmond, Va., on brief) for H.K. Porter Co., Inc. & Southern Textile Corp.
(William V. Hoyle, Charles A. Smith, Philip S. Payne, Hoyle, Corbett, Hubbard, Smith & Payne on brief) for Raybestos-Manhatten, Inc.
(William B. Eley, Eley, Rutherford & Leafe, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc.
(Gerard E.W. Voyer, Taylor, Walker & Adams, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for Unarco Industries, Inc.
(M. Stuart Bateman, Newport News, Va., on brief), for Fibreboard Corp.
(Worth Banner, Reynolds, Smith & Winters, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for Pittsburgh Corp.
(John Y. Pearson, Jr., Bruce T. Bishop, Willcox, Savage, Lawrence, Dickson & Spindle, Norfolk, Va., on brief), for Celotex Corp.
(Henry C. Morgan, Jr., Pender, Coward, Addison & Morgan, Norfolk, Va., on brief) for Keene Corp.
Before WINTER, Chief Judge, and BUTZNER, RUSSELL, WIDENER, HALL, PHILLIPS, MURNAGHAN, SPROUSE, ERVIN, CHAPMAN, Circuit Judges, sitting in banc.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Certiorari Denied November 8, 1982. See 103 S.Ct. 364.
PER CURIAM:
The judgment of the district court is affirmed by an equally divided court.
Let's get started
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.
