354 F.2d 1005 - Bey v. Muldoon — 354 F.2d 1005

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently June 1991

10 federal appellate ·

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

¶1Sidney J. Smolinsky, Philadelphia, Pa. (Bernard Sacks, Dorfman, Pechner, Sacks & Dorfman, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

¶2William R. Deasey, Philadelphia, Pa. (Kelly, Deasey & Scanlan, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for Corry, Kelly, Muldoon, Sobelman and Philadelphia Marine Trade Ass’n,

¶3Marvin I. Barish, Philadelphia, Pa. (Abraham E. Freedman, Freedman, Borowsky & Lorry, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for ILA, Trustees of Pension Fund et al.

¶4Before BIGGS, Chief Judge and KALODNER and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6Much of the previous history of this case is set out in 217 F.Supp. 401 (E.D.Pa.1962), id., 404 (E.D.Pa.1963) and 223 F.Supp. 489 (E.D.Pa.1963), and need not be repeated here. The agreement was reformed in accordance with the opinion last cited and as required by it. See id. supra, 496. An examination of the record and of the briefs and consideration of the oral arguments lead us to the conclusion that the court below committed no error. Consequently, the order of the court below requiring judgment to be entered for the defendants and dissolving the injunction restraining the transfer of money from the royalty fund will be affirmed.