Raymond Hicks v. Hines Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
BOGGS, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff-appellant Raymond Hicks appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment against his Jones Act suit for exposure to chemicals and alleged subsequent bladder cancer. We agree that Hicks reasonably could have known that he had been harmed prior to the running of the statute of limitations, and therefore affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment.
I
Plaintiff-appellant Raymond Hicks worked for various barge companies from 1954 to 1967. He alleges that in the course of this work, he was exposed to chemicals such as chlorine, caustic soda and benzene,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- United States v. KubrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Burnett v. New York Central RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- James Leroy Jackson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corporation and Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc., DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1986
- Albert E. Albertson v. T.J. Stevenson & Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1984
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Fannie Ball (02-6289) Stephen Heiser (02-6311) v. Union Carbide Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
- Carlos Fonseca v. Consolidated Rail CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
- Gates v. Rohm & Haas Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
- Wagner v. Apex Marine Ship Management Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2000
- Lewis v. CSX Transportation, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2011
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.