Legal Opinion
Mull v. Colt Co.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 3, 1959PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
METZNER, District Judge.
Defendant Edwin Ackerman moves pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the ‘Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., to dismiss the complaint as to him on the ground that it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
The plaintiff seeks recovery for damages suffered as the result of the alleged negligence of the defendants. A taxicab owned by defendant Colt Co., Inc. ran into the plaintiff, crushing both of his legs. The case is here on diversity, since the plaintiff is a resident of New Jersey and the defendants are residents of New York. The injury occurred in…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Berkey v. Third Avenue Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Lowendahl v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1936
- Lowendahl v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
- Jenkins v. MoyseNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
- Halsted v. Globe Indemnity Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1932
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Zubik v. ZubikCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1967
- White v. Winchester Land Development Corp.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1979
- Mull v. Colt Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1962
- Walkovszky v. CarltonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1965
- Nos. 15940-15951Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1967