Sylvia Agronofsky, Helen Agronofsky and Abraham Agronofsky v. Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, a Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
1Per curiam
The question presented by this appeal is whether the court below abused its discretion in dismissing with'prejudice, for want of prosecution, pursuant to Rule 41(b), Fed.R.Civ.P., 28 U.S.C., and Rule 5(i) of the Rules of the court below, a complaint filed by the plaintiffs-appellants based on injuries alleged to have been sustained by them while riding in a bus operated by the defendant-appellee. The accident occurred seven' years ago. The suit was filed in 1951. The case has been removed from the trial list on at least three occasions on the appellants’ motion on the representation that a…
2Cited by7 opinions
- R. E. Peckham, Assignee and Trustee, Etc. v. Family Loan CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Tradeways Incorporated, Plaintiff-Appellee-Appellant v. Chrysler Corporation, Defendant-Appellant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1965
- Dalrymple v. Pittsburgh Consolidation Coal Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1959
- John Turner, Warden, Utah State Prison v. Fay Ward, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1963
- United States v. RosenbergDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1958
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.