Legal Opinion
Myers v. Reading Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided December 28, 1945No. Civil Action No. 4126PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
BARD, District Judge.
Defendant moves to set aside the verdict and judgment entered in favor of plaintiff and to have judgment entered in accordance with its motion for directed verdict under Rule 50 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, for the reason that there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict.
Plaintiff brought this action under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act1 and the Safety Appliance Act2 to recover for injuries sustained while classifying coal hoppers at the Port Richmond yard of the Reading Company.
The evidence adduced at trial…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Montgomery Ward & Co. v. DuncanSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Patton v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1901
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. ChamberlainSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- ætna Casualty & Surety Co. v. YeattsCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1941
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Myers v. Reading Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947