Tabas v. Tabas

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Tabas v. Tabas. Read the opinion of the Court — 47 F.3d 1280
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided March 7, 1995·No. 92-1495·Unknown

Opinion

Opinions of the United

1995 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

3-7-1995

Tabas v Tabas Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Docket 92-1495

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1995

Recommended Citation "Tabas v Tabas" (1995). 1995 Decisions. Paper 44. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1995/44

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 1995 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

No. 92-1495 and No. 92-1529

HARRIETTE S. TABAS; RICHARD S. TABAS;

NANCY C. TABAS; GERALD LEVINSON, As Executors of the Estate of CHARLES L. TABAS,

Appellants

v.

DANIEL M. TABAS; JOSEPH P. CAMPBELL;

JAMES J. MCSWIGGAN; LEE A. TABAS; ROBERT TABAS;

SUSAN TABAS TEPPER; LINDA TABAS STEMPEL;

JOANNE TABAS WURZAK; CAROL TABAS STOFMAN;

HOWARD WURZAK

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA (D.C. Civil Action No. 91-01355

Argued: January 26, 1993

Before: GREENBERG, ROTH, and LEWIS, Circuit Judges

Reargued In Banc October 18, 1994

Before: SLOVITER, Chief Judge, BECKER, STAPLETON, MANSMANN, GREENBERG, HUTCHINSON, SCIRICA, COWEN, NYGAARD, ALITO, LEWIS, ROTH, and MCKEE, Circuit Judges

ORDER AMENDING OPINION

Judge Alito's concurring opinion in the above captioned case filed February 13, 1995, is amended as follows:

The first sentence of that opinion ("I concur in the judgment, and I join parts I, II, VI, and VI of the opinion of the court.") is deleted. In its place, the following is inserted:

I concur in the judgment, and I join those parts of Judge Roth's opinion that constitute an opinion of the in banc court, i.e., parts I, II, V, and VI. I do not join part IV of Judge Roth's opinion.

\s\ Samuel A. Alito, Jr.

Circuit Judge

DATED: March 7, l995

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

Tabas v. Tabas, (3d Cir. 1995).

Tabas v. Tabas (Tabas v. Tabas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.