Ash v. Cort, 471 F.2d 811 (3rd Cir. 1973). · Go Syfert
Search
Ash v. Cort, 471 F.2d 811 (3rd Cir. 1973). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
10 citation events (1 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Cort v. Ash (scotus, 1975-06-17)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Cort v. Ash
SCOTUS · 1975 · confidence medium
Third, the court found that “[i]n failing to prove a likelihood of success on the merits, plaintiff has failed to prove that irreparable harm would result if an injunction is not granted.” Id., at 232. 5 In affirming, the Court of Appeals observed that while the District Court’s opinion seemed to preclude respondent from any ultimate relief, the opinion addressed only a request for preliminary relief and therefore had to be considered only tentative, leaving respondent free to renew his contentions on final hearing. 471 F. 2d, at 812. 6 Respondent seems to invite the Court, in effect, to…
cited Cited as authority (rule) Ash v. Cort
3rd Cir. · 1974 · confidence medium
Id. at 812.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Ash v. Cort
3rd Cir. · 1974 · confidence medium
Id. at 812.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Richard A. Ash, on Behalf of Himself, and on Behalf of Bethlehem Steel Corporation
v.
Stewart S. Cort, Chairman, All Being Directors of Bethlehem Steel Corporation, and Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Nominal
72-1984.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Jan 5, 1973.
471 F.2d 811
Published

471 F.2d 811

Richard A. ASH, on behalf of himself, and on behalf of
Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Appellant,
v.
Stewart S. CORT, Chairman, et al., all being directors of
Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Defendants, and
Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Nominal Defendant.

No. 72-1984.

United States Court of Appeals,
Third Circuit.

Argued Dec. 15, 1972.
Decided Jan. 5, 1973.

Cletus P. Lyman, Lyman & Ash, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.

Edwin P. Rome, Jerome R. Richter, William H. Roberts, Blank, Rome, Klaus & Comisky, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.

Before SEITZ, Chief Judge, and ALDISERT and MAX ROSENN, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

1

This is an appeal from a denial of a request for preliminary relief seeking to enjoin Bethlehem Steel from furnishing funds for the publication and dissemination of copies of a speech made by the corporation's president. Appellant alleged that this practice offended 18 U.S. C. Secs. 591, 610, governing the conduct of federal elections and political activities. We affirm the denial of the request for a preliminary injunction. Our holding is narrowly limited. We affirm solely because we view as not clearly erroneous the district court's finding, 350 F.Supp. 227, that appellant would not be irreparably harmed by the denial of his request.

2

Although the court reached other legal considerations which facially would seem to preclude appellant from proceeding to final hearing, we were assured at oral argument by counsel for appellees that he considered those conclusions to have been preliminary only and limited to the context of the request for preliminary relief. He conceded that appellant would be free to present anew his original contentions in the district court as the case proceeds to final adjudication. We therefore conclude that appellant is not foreclosed from reasserting at final hearing his contentions of standing and statutory construction of 18 U.S.C. Secs. 591, 610 and, thus, do not meet these questions nor the issue of mootness.

3

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.