United States v. Cardonick, 328 F.2d 315 (3rd Cir. 1964). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Cardonick, 328 F.2d 315 (3rd Cir. 1964). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
33 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 18 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Gauer v. Essex County Division of Welfare (njsuperctappdiv, 1985-06-26)
Treatment trajectory · 1964 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1964 1995 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Gauer v. Essex County Division of Welfare
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. · 1985 · signal: see · confidence high
See DiNapoli v. Exxon, 549 F.Supp. 449 (DCNJ 1982), quoting National State Bank v. Terminal Construction Corp., 217 F.Supp. 341 (DNJ 1963), aff'd 328 F.2d 315 (3d Cir.1964).
discussed Cited "see" Southern Railway Co. v. United States
Ct. Cl. · 1981 · signal: accord · confidence high
In order to constitute an equitable estoppel or estoppel in pais there must exist: 1) a false representation or concealment of material facts; 2) it must have been made with knowledge, actual or constructive, of the facts; 3) the party to whom it was made must have been without knowledge or the means of knowledge of the real facts; 4) it must have been made with the intention that it should be acted on; 5) and the party to whom it was made must have relied on or acted on it to his prejudice. 31 C.J.S. 2d Estoppel § 67 (1964); accord, Nat’l State Bank v. Terminal Construction Corp., 217 F. S…
cited Cited "see" United States Ex Rel. Excavation Construction, Inc. v. Glenn-Stewart-Pinckney Builders & Developers, Inc.
D. Del. · 1975 · signal: see · confidence high
See National State Bank of Newark v. Terminal Const. Corp., 217 F.Supp. 341, 356 (D.N.J.1963) aff’d. 328 F.2d 315 (C.A.3, 1964).
discussed Cited "see" Robertson Lumber Co. v. Progressive Contractors, Inc.
N.D. · 1968 · signal: see · confidence high
See National State Bank of Newark v. Terminal Construction Corporation, 328 F.2d 315 (3rd Cir.1964), affirming National State Bank of Newark v. Terminal Const. Corp., 217 F.Supp. 341, at 351 (D.C.N.J.1963).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
David Cardonick, President, Reuben Cardonick, Secretary, Leon Cardonick, Treasurer, of Arrow Vending and Distributing Corp. David Cardonick, in No. 14,648. Reuben Cardonick, in No. 14,649
14649_1.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Mar 5, 1964.
328 F.2d 315
Published

328 F.2d 315

UNITED STATES of America
v.
David CARDONICK, President, Reuben Cardonick, Secretary,
Leon Cardonick, Treasurer, of Arrow Vending and
Distributing Corp.
David Cardonick, Appellant in No. 14,648.
Reuben Cardonick, Appellant in No. 14,649.

Nos. 14648, 14649.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Argued Feb. 19, 1964.
Decided March 5, 1964.

Alan Jay Davis, Philadelphia, Pa. (Thomas D. McBride, Herbert W. Yanowitz, Philadelphia, Pa., Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen, Philadelphia, Pa., of counsel, on the brief) for appellants.

Isaac S. Garb, Asst. U.S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa. (Drew J. T. O'Keefe, U.S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.

Before KALODNER and HASTIE, Circuit Judges and KIRKPATRICK, District judge.

PER CURIAM.

1

On review of the record we find no error. The Orders of the District Court revoking probation and imposing sentences of imprisonment will be affirmed.