Allegheny International, Inc., Sunbeam Corporation, Sunbeam Holdings, Inc., Almet/lawnlite, Inc., Chemetron Corp., Integrated Specialties, Inc., Allegheny Intl. (Usa) Inc., Al-Industrial Products, Inc., Allegheny Intl. Exercise Co., Woodshaft, Inc., Chemetron Investments, Inc., Infoswitch, Inc., Eliskim, Inc. v. Al Tech Specialty Steel Corp

Citations: 950 F.2d 721; 1991 WL 268645Docket: 91-3346

Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit; November 28, 1991; Federal Appellate Court

Combined Opinion AnalysisCombined Opinion SummaryCombined Opinion Original

Narrative Opinion Summary

In the case of Allegheny International, Inc. et al. v. Al Tech Specialty Steel Corp., the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the decision from the Western District of Pennsylvania, presided over by Judge Bloch. The appeal, numbered 91-3346, was concluded on November 29, 1991. The ruling pertains to various corporate entities, including Sunbeam Corporation, Almet/Lawnlite, Inc., and others, in a dispute involving Al Tech Specialty Steel Corp. The appellate court upheld the lower court's findings, indicating that the legal arguments presented by the appellants did not warrant a reversal of the previous ruling. The affirmation suggests that the original court's decision was sound and supported by the evidence and legal standards applied in the case.

Legal Issues Addressed

Affirmation of Lower Court Rulingssubscribe to see similar legal issues

Application: The decision made by the Western District of Pennsylvania was affirmed, showcasing the soundness of the original judgment based on evidence and applied legal standards.

Reasoning: The affirmation suggests that the original court's decision was sound and supported by the evidence and legal standards applied in the case.

Appellate Review Standardssubscribe to see similar legal issues

Application: The appellate court reviewed the lower court's findings and determined that the legal arguments presented by the appellants did not justify overturning the original decision.

Reasoning: The appellate court upheld the lower court's findings, indicating that the legal arguments presented by the appellants did not warrant a reversal of the previous ruling.