United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
98 F.R.D. 455 (1983)
Barab (plaintiff) sued Menford (defendant) for injuries she received after slipping on a doormat at an inn operated by Menford. Menford filed a third-party claim against Channel Home Centers, Inc. (Channel) (third-party defendant), asserting that Channel had sold Menford the doormat and was obligated to fully indemnify Menford for any liability established in Barab’s action. Channel denied that it had sold the doormat to Menford and sought to implead Joy Plastics, Inc. (Joy) as the actual supplier of the doormat. Channel’s motion to implead Joy was made fairly late in the trial process, allegedly because Channel had earlier lacked information establishing Joy as the true supplier. There was no relationship between Channel and Joy. The court considered Channel’s motion, which was unopposed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Van Artsdalen, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 237,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,200 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.