Irving Gostin v. Jules Nelson, and Josef Hoffman, D/B/A Merit Associates, and Individually
Cases that cite this one
17 later published cases cite this decision.
- IN RE: MUSHROOM DIRECT PURCHASER ANTITRUST LITIGATION (District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania 2020)
- WINN-DIXIE STORES, INC. v. EASTERN MUSHROOM MARKETING COOPERATIVE, INC. (District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania 2020)
- Wilson v. Parisi (District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania 2008)
- Lighthouse Institute for Evangelism, Inc. v. City of Long Branch (District Court, D. New Jersey 2005)
- DiGiorgio Corp. v. Mendez and Co., Inc. (District Court, D. New Jersey 2002)
- Waters v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey (District Court, D. New Jersey 2001)
- Ecolab, Inc. v. Amerikem Laboratories, Inc. (District Court, D. New Jersey 2000)
- United States v. Consolidated Rail Corp. (United States District Court for the District of Delaware 1990)
- Borecki v. Eastern International Management Corp. (District Court, D. New Jersey 1988)
- Lowe v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. (District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania 1984)
- Cunningham v. Associates Capital Services Corp. (Ind. Ct. App. 1981)
- Co-Build Companies, Inc. v. Farrow (District Court, Virgin Islands 1975)
- Hassan v. Hartford Insurance Group (United States District Court for the District of Delaware 1974)
- McShane Contracting Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. (District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania 1973)
- Olympic Junior, Inc., in No. 71-1440 v. David Crystal, Inc. Appeal of Edward Defabio, in No. 71-1441. Appeal of Paul D'alessandro, in No. 71-1442 (3d Cir. 1972)
- United States v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. (District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania 1972)
- Clark v. Employers Mutuals of Wausau (District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania 1969)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
This action for breach of contract came before the court below on successive motions filed by the appellee under Fed.Rules Civ.Proc., rule 56, 28 U.S.C.A. After the entry of a partial judgment on the issue of liability the court entered a final judgment in favor of the appellee on the issue of damages. On this appeal the appellant contests only the latter judgment.
The appellee’s second motion was predicated on the appellant’s answers to interrogatories. These answers furnished an adequate basis for the assessment of damages. The appellant filed a counter-affidavit, the relevant portions of which were based entirely on information and belief and not on personal knowledge. Since the counter-affidavit did not meet the requirements of subdivision (e) of the said rule, as amended, the court properly disregarded it and entered judgment for the appel-lee. Durovic v. Palmer, 342 F.2d 634 (7th Cir. 1965); F. S. Bowen Electric Co. v. J. D. Hedin Construction Co., 114 *372 U.S.App.D.C. 361, 316 F.2d 362 (1963) ; Hoston v. J. R. Watkins Company, 300 F.2d 869 (9th Cir. 1962).
The judgment of the court below, D.C., 41 F.R.D. 48, will be affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.