UNITED STATES of America,
v.
John F. "Duffy" CONLEY, William C. Curtin, Sheila F. Smith, John Francis "Jack" Conley, Thomas "Bud" McGrath, Mark A. Abbott, Thomas Rossi, William Steinhart, Roberta Fleagle, Robin Spratt, Monica C. Kail, William J. Reed, Joanne T. Smith, Kenneth "Ron" Goodwin, Lawrence N. "Neudy" Demino, Sr., Christopher "Chris" Kail, Joseph A. Devita, Frank Garofalo, Thomas D. Ciocco, Michael Sukaly, Phillip M. "Mike" Ferrell, Anestos "Naz" Rodites, and William E. Rusin, Defendants.
United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
December 8, 1994.
December 8, 1994.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
James A. Wilson, Asst. U.S. Atty., Dayton, OH, for U.S.
Lee Markovitz, Pittsburgh, PA, for Joann Smith.
Ray Radakovich, Pittsburgh, PA, for Fleagle.
Stanley Greenfield, Martha Bailor, Pittsburgh, PA, for Rossi.
Gary Zimmerman, Pittsburgh, PA, for Ferrell.
Raymond M. Maloney, Pittsburgh, PA, for Ciocco.
John Zagari, Peter Marcoline, Pittsburgh, PA, for Rusin.
Anthony Mariani, Pittsburgh, PA, for Curtin.
James Wymard, Wm. Difenderfer, Pittsburgh, PA, for Conley (Duffy).
Foster Stewart, Pittsburgh, PA, for C. Kail.
Edward J. Osterman, Pittsburgh, PA, for Goodwin.
Carl M. Janavitz, Pittsburgh, PA, for Garofalo.
Carmen A. Martucci, Bethel Park, PA, for Spratt.
Joel Johnston, Pittsburgh, PA, for Abbott.
Gary Gerson, Pittsburgh, PA, for John "Jack" Conley.
John Goodrich, Goodrich, Micale & Search, Pittsburgh, PA, for Sukaly.
Ellen Viakley, Pittsburgh, PA, for Sheila Smith.
Vincent Baginski, Pittsburgh, PA, for Rodites.
Samuel J. Reich, Reich, Werner & Alexander, Pittsburgh, PA, for Reed.
William Acker, Pittsburgh, PA, for Demino.
Joseph Kanfoush, Pittsburgh, PA, for Devita.
Michael Foglia, Pittsburgh, PA, for M. Kail.
Carl Parise, Pittsburgh, PA, for Steinhart.
Caroline Roberto, Pittsburgh, PA, for McGrath.
United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
LEE, District Judge.
Before the Court is the government's Motion for Clarification (Document No. 969) which seeks "clarification and reexamination of the Court's ruling ..." of July 14, 1994, compelling pretrial disclosure of certain Fed. R.Evid.Rule 404(b) ("404(b)") material, among other things. Actually, the motion for clarification requests relief more in the nature of reconsideration...
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.
