Legal Opinion
Randolph v. Tennessee Valley Authority
District Court, N.D. Alabama
Decided June 8, 1992No. Civ. A. 91-AR-1541-SPublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
ACKER, District Judge.
The court has for consideration the motion of Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), defendant in the above-entitled cause, for judgment on the pleadings. This motion is based on the contention that the statute of limitations bars the action. For the following reasons, the motion will be deferred for ruling for a period of ten (10) days on certain conditions to be set forth below.
Pertinent Facts
Plaintiffs, Henry Randolph and David Roberts, filed this action on July 8, 1991, a Monday, alleging that they sustained injuries in a car accident on July 6,1989, as…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Wells v. Simonds Abrasive Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. CarrollSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
- Bodnar v. Piper Aircraft Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1980
- STATE, DEPT. OF REVENUE v. LindseyCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1977
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Rosa and Raymond Parks Institute for Self Development v. Target CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2016
- Reece v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc.District Court, N.D. Alabama · 2014
- Rosa & Raymond Parks Institute for Self Development v. Target Corp.District Court, M.D. Alabama · 2015
- Laddin Ex Rel. Liquidating Estate of Verilink Corp. v. Belden (In Re Verilink Corp.)United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama · 2009
- Penaloza v. Drummond Co.District Court, N.D. Alabama · 2019
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.