Legal Opinion
Curtis Machine Co. v. MacInnes
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 3, 1958No. Civ. A. No. 451PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WILLSON, District Judge.
In this diversity action the verdict of the jury was in favor of the defendants. At the close of all of the evidence, plaintiff moved for a directed verdict. Decision was reserved on this motion. Plaintiff has now filed timely motions under Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. rule 50, 28 U.S.C.A., for judgment in accordance with its motion for a directed verdict, and in the alternative, for a new trial.
The undisputed facts are briefly stated. In 1953, the Boeing Airplane Company was engaged in making B-52 bombers for the United States Navy. Twin Coach Company of Buffalo, New York, was…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wilkerson v. McCarthySupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Magee v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1954
- Willits v. Yellow Cab Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1954
- Roan Dixon v. Virginian Railway Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1957
3Cited by2 opinions
- Peterson v. Calmar Steamship Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1969
- Buda v. Royal Netherlands SS Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1967