Goodwin v. Celutel, Inc.

Third Circuit

Goodwin v. Celutel, Inc.

931 F.2d 50, 1991 WL 58299

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedMarch 15, 1991

Docket90-1701

StatusPublished

This text of 931 F.2d 50 (Goodwin v. Celutel, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Goodwin v. Celutel, Inc., 931 F.2d 50, 1991 WL 58299 (3d Cir. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

931 F.2d 50

Goodwin (Barclay R., Jr.), Cellular Logic, Inc., Cell
Cal-II, Cellucall, Inc., GBBV Investment Co., Laurmann
(Giselle V.), Morelli (Robert), Neoteric Communications
Group, Ramcell, Inc. R.H. Associates, Tricel Group, U.S.
Cellular, Inc., Port Services Co., Capper (Emmett M.),
Jordan (Robert Bruce), Russell (Owen C.), B & L Cellular,
Suggs (Gordon), U.S. Cellular
v.
Celutel, Inc., Scarpa (Frank S.), McCaw Cellular
Communications, Inc., Vanguard Cellullar Serv.

NO. 90-1701

United States Court of Appeals,
Third Circuit.

MAR 15, 1991

Appeal From: E.D.Pa.,

Kelly, J.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI