Berg Chilling Systems, Inc. v. Hull Corporation Sp Industries, Inc

U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit · Decided 2006-01-31

Cited by 176 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

AMBRO, Circuit Judge, Dissenting. Although the majority ably argues for the application of Pennsylvania law to preclude Berg’s successor liability claim, I respectfully dissent because (1) I am not convinced that Pennsylvania law should apply to this dispute and, (2) even if it does, I do not believe that Pennsylvania law precludes a finding of successor liability. There is no question that,…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.