TELEDYNE INDUSTRIES, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
ODIF PODELL ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS, AND EON CORPORATION AND KERNS MANUFACTURING CORP., DEFENDANTS
TELEDYNE INDUSTRIES, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
ODIF PODELL ET AL., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS, AND EON CORPORATION AND KERNS MANUFACTURING CORP., DEFENDANTS
546 F.2d 495
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (1976)
Caution
Cited by 12 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:
On this appeal from a judgment against the defendants-appellants for money damages, we affirm on the opinion of Hon. Whitman Knapp, United States District Court Judge, Southern District of New York, reported at 401 F.Supp. 729 (S.D.N.Y. 1975).* The appellants also appeal from Judge Knapp’s order denying a new trial on the alleged ground of newly discovered evidence. The order is affirmed as we find that appeal to be totally without merit and frivolous. Therefore, pursuant to 28 U-.S.C. § 1912 and Fed.R.App.P. 38, we assess the appellants double costs and, in addition, $1,500 in attorneys’ fees.
*
See also Judge Bauman’s opinion on a motion for summary judgment in this case, 373 F.Supp. 191 (S.D.N.Y. 1974).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Mortgageamerica Corp. v. Mortgageamerica Corp., 714 F.2d 1266 (5th Cir. 1983)
-
Cummings v. United States & Colonel James M. Sigler, 648 F.2d 289 (5th Cir. 1981)
-
Cumberland OIL Corp. & Sugargrove, Ltd. v. Thropp, 791 F.2d 1037 (2d Cir. 1986)
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence