Document Type

Case Brief

Publication Date



Limited partnership appealed from order of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, William W. Knox, J., denying its motion to intervene in lawsuit brought by all of its limited partners. The Court of Appeals, Seitz, Chief Judge, held that: (1) limited partnership did not have absolute right to intervene the action, despite partnership's contention that its interests would not be represented at all if plaintiff limited partners were precluded from asserting claims stated in three counts on ground they belonged to partnership as an entity, where, if that happened, the partnership would not be bound by res judicata from later bringing its own action asserting those claims, and (2) limited partnership was precluded from intervening, either as matter of right or pursuant to its motion for permissive intervention, where partnerships' motion for intervention was directed toward forestalling defendants' argument that certain claims asserted by plaintiffs belonged to partnership entity rather than its limited partners. Motion to dismiss appeal denied and order denying motion for intervention affirmed


United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit


Seitz, Gibbons, Higginbotham


Robert L. Potter, Roslyn M. Litman, John E. Grasberger, Litman, Litman, Harris & Specter, P. A., Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant. William H. Holden, Jr., Weinberg & Green, Baltimore, Md., for appellees, Alfred A. Shamah, Steven J. Gumenick, and Brunswick Management Corp. Stewart B. Barmen, Raphael, Sheinberg & Barmen, P. A., Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellee, Robert E. Rose. Paul R. Rosen, Edward M. Dunham, Jr., Spector, Cohen, Hunt & Rosen, P. C., Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee, Spector, Cohen, Hunt & Rosen. James J. Restivo, Jr., Arthur J. Schwab, Frederick N. Egler, Jr., Reed, Smith, Shaw & McClay, Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellees, Arthur R. Spector, Edward E. Cohen and Betsy Z. Cohen.

Included in

Law Commons