From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bartol v. McGinnes

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
May 17, 1961
194 F. Supp. 82 (E.D. Pa. 1961)

Opinion

Civ. A. No. 24596.

May 17, 1961.

James J. Cloran, Lewis H. Van Dusen, Jr., Drinker, Biddle Reath, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs.

Walter E. Alessandroni, U.S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant.


After the filing of the court's opinion, findings of fact and conclusions of law, the defendant filed a motion under F.R.Civ.P. 52(b), 28 U.S.C. requesting the court to supplement its opinion and findings by making three additional findings of fact.

After a careful rereading and analysis of the testimony in the case the court is of the opinion that the requested additional findings of fact should not be made for the reason that none of them is warranted by the evidence in the case.

Order

And now, May 17, 1961, defendant's request for additional findings of fact is refused.


Summaries of

Bartol v. McGinnes

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
May 17, 1961
194 F. Supp. 82 (E.D. Pa. 1961)
Case details for

Bartol v. McGinnes

Case Details

Full title:George E. BARTOL, Jr., George E. Bartol, III, and Central-Penn National…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: May 17, 1961

Citations

194 F. Supp. 82 (E.D. Pa. 1961)

Citing Cases

Pappas v. Moss

In all other respects, plaintiffs' motion is denied; it appearing that none of the other requested additional…