Dantzler v. Defender Shipping Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
BODY, District Judge.
Presently before the Court are the plaintiff’s alternative motions for judgment n. o. v. and for a new trial. Interrogatories to the jury in this case were answered by a jury finding that the defendants, owners and operations of the S.S. “Smith Defender”, were not negligent in any way. Negligence was the only theory of liability presented to the jury; thus, on November 21, 1967, we entered judgment in favor of the defendants.
On November 28, 1967, plaintiff’s counsel filed the post-trial motions here at issue. According to the mandatory dictates of Local…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- De Zon v. American President Lines, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Keiler v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1966
- Tarter v. MylinDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1966
3Cited by7 opinions
- Beron v. Kramer-Trenton CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1975
- Eulo v. Deval Aerodynamics, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1969
- Green v. Sanitary Scale CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1969
- Cruz v. American Export Isbranbtsen Lines, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1970
- Shaw v. LauritzenDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1969
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.