PER CURIAM:
The judgment of the District Court is affirmed on the well-reasoned opinion of District Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr., Sanders v. Thrall Car Manufacturing Co., 582 F.Supp. 945 (S.D.N.Y.1983).
730 F.2d 910 (1984)
Phyllis SANDERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THRALL CAR MANUFACTURING COMPANY, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued March 19, 1984.
Decided March 28, 1984.
Avrom S. Fisher, Brooklyn, N.Y., for plaintiff-appellant.
Lewis A. Kaplan, New York City (Harriet L. Goldberg, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, Jack C. Auspitz, Charles S. Barquist, Parker Auspitz Neeseman & Delehanty P.C., New York City, on brief), for defendants-appellees.
Before MANSFIELD, NEWMAN and PRATT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
The judgment of the District Court is affirmed on the well-reasoned opinion of District Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr., Sanders v. Thrall Car Manufacturing Co., 582 F.Supp. 945 (S.D.N.Y.1983).
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.
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.
Comment
User Comments