Vito v. Bray

Third Circuit

Vito v. Bray

961 F.2d 1569, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 11036, 1992 WL 94329

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit

DecidedApril 10, 1992

Docket91-1866

StatusPublished

This text of 961 F.2d 1569 (Vito v. Bray) 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

Vito v. Bray, 961 F.2d 1569, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 11036, 1992 WL 94329 (3d Cir. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

961 F.2d 1569

Vito (Emanuel J.)
v.
Bray (Larry), McCormick (Robert), Cimacasky (Richard),
Knitter (Thomas), Bavaria (Thomas), George (Kenney), Serfass
(Robert), Flyte (Clayton), Powell (Roxanne), Ceraul (David),
Molnar (John), Lysek (Stanley), Albanese (Leroy), Philips
(Milton), Baker (David), Sabia (Tony), Prichard (Richard),
Dearment (Douglas), Bushkirk (David), Blue Mountain
Consolidated Water Company, Borough of Wind Gap, Wind Gap
Borough, Wind Gap Planning Commissioner

NO. 91-1866

United States Court of Appeals,
Third Circuit.

Apr 10, 1992

Appeal From: E.D.Pa.

AFFIRMED.

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