|
 |
 
- Ebeling
& Reuss Ltd. v. Swarovski
International Trading Corp.
A.G. drafted briefs
on appeal for plaintiff Ebeling
& Reuss ("E&R"),
which sought affirmance of
jury's verdict rendered in
this commercial case awarding
to E&R damages totaling
$42,350,000, including $16,500,000
in punitive damages. Result:
Judgment affirmed and U.S.
Supreme Court review, sought
by adversaries, denied.
- Pennsylvania
Employees Benefit Trust Fund
v. TH Services Group, Inc.
represented defendant/appellee
TH Services Group, which was
opposing a multifaceted challenge
to a $7.3 million commercial
arbitration award it won after
the plaintiff refused to honor
a contingent fee auditing
contract. After Bashman briefed
and argued the appeal, the
Third Circuit unanimously
affirmed the district court's
decision upholding the arbitration
award. This case was listed
in The Legal Intelligencer's
annual round-up of significant
Third Circuit rulings for
1999.
- Fraternal
Order of Police v. Crucifucks
presented oral argument on
behalf of appellee Borders
Books and Music, which the
Philadelphia FOP had sued
for distributing a musical
group's compact disc that
bore the photograph of a slain
officer originally displayed
on an FOP poster. The Legal
Intelligencer, in a report
on this oral argument, called
the matter "[o]ne of
the most interesting First
Amendment cases to come before
the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals" in 1998.
Result: Judgment
dismissing Borders affirmed.
- Krueger
Assocs., Inc. v. ADT,
affirming grant of summary
judgment in favor of security
alarm company client by means
of an opinion that industry
publication described as “an
exceedingly important decision”
for security alarm companies.
Bashman briefed and orally
argued the appeal.
::
VIEW COURT OPINION
- In
re Robert B. Surrick
appointed by the Third Circuit
to argue in support of affirmance
of the en banc ruling of a
sharply divided U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District
of Pennsylvania imposing a
reciprocal disciplinary suspension
on Surrick, the brother of
a currently-serving E.D. Pa.
federal district judge, based
on the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania’s
earlier suspension of Surrick
from the practice of law.
After receiving an appellate
brief and oral argument from
Bashman, the Third Circuit,
by a vote of 2-1, affirmed
Surrick’s suspension.
::
VIEW AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT
OF AFFIRMANCE
::
VIEW COURT OPINION
- Zucker
v. Westinghouse Corp.
appointed by the Third Circuit
to argue in support of affirmance
of the ruling of then Chief
District Judge D. Brooks Smith
(W.D. Pa.) refusing to award
attorney’s fees to a
pro se lawyer/objector whose
objection had saved Westinghouse
$750,000 in a shareholder’s
derivative suit. After receiving
an appellate brief and oral
argument from Bashman, the
Third Circuit unanimously
affirmed the trial court’s
ruling.
::
VIEW AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT
OF AFFIRMANCE
::
VIEW COURT OPINION
- Spruill
v. Rosemeyer appointed
by the Third Circuit to represent
an indigent state prisoner
whose appeal presented a significant
question of federal civil
rights law over which other
federal appellate courts had
divided. The Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania, after receiving
the opening brief on appeal
that Bashman had written,
“confessed error”
and agreed that the federal
district court’s ruling
against the prisoner had to
be reversed for the reasons
argued in Bashman’s
brief on appeal. Thereafter,
the Third Circuit agreed and
ruled in favor of Bashman’s
client.
::
VIEW BRIEF FOR APPELLANT
- Moscato
v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
appointed by the Third Circuit
to represent an indigent federal
prisoner who instituted a
civil rights suit without
counsel. While the Third Circuit
ultimately ruled that it could
not consider the merits of
the prisoner's appeal due
to a procedural default that
the prisoner committed before
he had counsel, then Chief
Judge Becker included in his
opinion for the Court the
following evaluation of Mr.
Bashman's performance on the
briefs and at oral argument:
"Although this appeal
was filed pro se, we appointed
Howard Bashman, Esquire as
counsel for [appellant]. Mr.
Bashman has done an outstanding
job, and we commend him for
his excellent legal work."
98 F.3d 757, 760 n.5 (3d Cir.
1996).
- Fischer
v. Philadelphia Electric Co.
represented PECO Energy Co.,
which sought reversal of a
multi-million dollar judgment
entered against it in a non-jury
class action brought by former
employees who alleged that
they had been defrauded out
of pension benefits due them.
Result: Judgment
reversed with direction to
enter judgment in favor of
PECO Energy Co.
|
|
|
Law Offices of
Howard J. Bashman
500 Office Center Drive
Suite 400
Fort Washington, PA 19034
Phone: (215) 830-1458
hjb@hjbashman.com |
|
|
