Legal Opinion

Thompson v. Hocking Valley Ry. Co.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided November 5, 1930No. 5470PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

This ease was presented to the court below as being an action for negligence under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (45 USCA §§ 51-59). The court thought that plaintiff’s proofs did not tend to show negligence, and so instructed a verdict for defendant. It is now apparent that the petition’s claim for relief, “under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act and the amendments thereto,” and the stated facts in the petition, went far toward making a ease under the Boiler Inspection Act (45 USCA § 22 et seq.); indeed, the defect charged pertained wholly to a locomotive boiler and its connections.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Rice v. Baltimore & O. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930
  2. Pappas v. Baltimore & O. R.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Twachtman v. ConnellyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1939
  2. Terminal R. Ass'n of St. Louis v. KimbrelCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1939
  3. Kenneth Lippert, Jr., Cross-Appellee v. Norfolk and Western Railway Company, Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1989

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API