Elliott v. Kiesewetter

Opinion

Opinions of the United

1996 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

10-16-1996

Elliott v. Kiesewetter Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Docket 95-3104,95-3105

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1996

Recommended Citation "Elliott v. Kiesewetter" (1996). 1996 Decisions. Paper 41. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1996/41

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 1996 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

Nos. 95-3104 and 95-3105

___________

CONSTANCE K. ELLIOTT; PATRICIA J. KIESEWETTER; LINTON A. ELLIOTT; CHARLES L. ELLIOTT, individually and/or as a Minor, by Constance K. Elliott, his Parent and Guardian; JONATHAN B. ELLIOTT, a Minor by Constance K. Elliott, the Parent and Guardian

vs.

WILLIAM B. KIESEWETTER, JR.

WILLIAM B. KIESEWETTER, JR. and JAYNE H. KIESEWETTER* (*Pursuant to Rule 12(a), F.R.A.P),

Appellants No. 95-3104.

___________

CONSTANCE K. ELLIOTT; PATRICIA J. KIESEWETTER; LINTON A. ELLIOTT; CHARLES L. ELLIOTT; JONATHAN B. ELLIOTT, Minors by Constance K. Elliott, their parent and guardian

vs.

WILLIAM B. KIESEWETTER, JR. JAYNE H. KIESEWETTER

WILLIAM B. KIESEWETTER, JR. and JAYNE H. KIESEWETTER

Appellants No. 95-3105.

___________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

(D.C. Civil Nos. 93-cv-00753 and 94-cv-00576)

___________

ARGUED MARCH 4, 1996

BEFORE: MANSMANN, ALITO, LEWIS, Circuit Judges.

___________

ORDER AMENDING SLIP OPINION

__________

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Slip Opinion filed in this case on October 9, 1996, be amended as follows: At the end of the first paragraph under Section II.A.

(page 4) the following footnote shall be added:

The subject matter jurisdiction of the district court for both the Accounting Action and the Fraudulent Conveyance Action was based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1332, diversity of citizenship. The matter in controversy in each action is in excess of $50,000 and each dispute is between citizens of different states.

We have appellate jurisdiction, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), over all interlocutory orders of a district court which grant, continue, modify, refuse, or dissolve injunctions.

After the jury returned a verdict against the Kiesewetters, the Beneficiaries' moved for a preliminary injunction. The district court entered a bench order in both the Accounting Action and the Fraudulent Conveyance Action freezing all assets held in the name or on behalf of William B. Kiesewetter, Jr, including those jointly held with Jayne H. Kiesewetter. On February 1, 1995, the district court reduced the bench order into a memorandum order which addressed a number of other matters that are unrelated to the prejudgment asset freeze. The Kiesewetters filed this appeal from only the asset freeze provisions of the February 1, 1995 order.

BY THE COURT

/s/ Timothy K. Lewis Circuit Judge

Dated: October 16, l996