Clinchfield R. Co. v. Dunn
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
HICKENLOOPER, Circuit Judge.
Having instituted her action against the “Clinebfield Railroad Company, a corporate successor of tbe Carolina, Clinebfield & Ohio Railway Company,” plaintiff subsequently filed án amended or substituted declaration agáinst tbe same defendant, under the same name, but designating it as “lessee of 'the Carolina, Clinebfield & Ohio Railway Company,” and claiming tbe right to bold such lessee by virtue of said lease and tbe statutes of Tennessee (unmentioned in the first declaration), for a liability incurred by tbe Carolina, Clinchfield & Ohio Railway Company under…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. WulfSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- New York Central & Hudson River Railroad v. KinneySupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Friederichsen v. RenardSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Seaboard Air Line Railway v. RennSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Seaboard Air Line Railway v. KoenneckeSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lomax Ex Rel. Lomax v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1957
- Manhattan Oil Co. v. MosbyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1934
- FL Mendez & Co. v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1947
- White v. Holland Furnace Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1939
- Blair v. DurhamCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1943
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.