1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 153 F.3d
  5. 153 F.3d 124 (1998)
 

FEIDT v. OWENS CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP.

No. 97-5177.

153 F.3d 124 (1998)

Gerald E. FEIDT, Jr.; Arlene Feidt, his wife v. OWENS CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION; Abex Corporation; Acands, Inc.; Alliedsignal, Inc.; Amchem Products, Inc.; Anchor Packing Company; A.P. Green Industries, Inc.; Armstrong World Industries, Inc.; Babcock & Wilcox Company; Combustion Engineering, Inc.; Flexitallic Gasket Company; Flintkote Company; Foster Wheeler Corporation; Gaf Corporation, in itself and successor to Ruberoid Corporation; Garlock, Inc.; General Electric Corporation; Ingersoll-Rand Company; Lear Siegler Diversified Holdings Corporation; Pittsburgh Corning Corporation, in itself and as successor to UNARCO; PPG Industries, Inc., as alter ego and/or successor to Pittsburgh Corning Corporation; Rapid American Corporation, in itself and as successor to Philip Carey Manufacturing Company; Turner & Newall, Ltd.; Uniroyal, Inc.; CBS Corporation; Westinghouse Electric Supply Corporation; Worthington Pump Corporation; John Corporations, (1-50) *CBS Corporation, Appellant *Pursuant to Rule 43(b), F.R.A.P.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Decided August 24, 1998.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Thomas F. Marshall, Law Office of Thomas F. Marshall, Mount Holly, NJ; David P. Callet (argued), Cindy M. Bryton, Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, Washington, DC, for Appellant.

Joshua M. Spielberg (argued), Franklin P. Solomon, Tomar Simonoff Adourian O'Brien Kaplan Jacoby & Graziano, Cherry Hill, for Appellees, Gerald E. Feidt, Jr. and Arlene Feidt.

Bruce S. Haines, Hangley, Aronchick, Segal & Pudlin, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellee, Uniroyal, Inc.

David B. Siegel, Robert L. Willmore, Karen D. Burke, Crowell & Moring, Washington, DC, for amicus curiae E.I. duPont de Nemours and Company in support of appellant.

Before: GREENBERG, SCIRICA, and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges

OPINION OF THE COURT

GREENBERG, Circuit Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

Appellant CBS Corporation, which during the time relevant to this appeal was known as Westinghouse Electric Corporation ("Westinghouse"), appeals from the district court order entered January 10, 1997, remanding this matter to state court.1 According to Westinghouse, the district court erred in remanding the case because its petition properly invoked removal...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

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.

Citing Cases