Legal Opinion
Frasure v. Union Pacific Railroad
District Court, C.D. California
Decided November 1, 1991No. CV 91-560 CBM (Ex)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
CONSUELO BLAND MARSHALL, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the motion of defendant Union Pacific Railroad, Company (“UP”) for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. At the September 16, 1991 hearing, the Court granted defendant’s motion and hereby issues the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. UP is a corporation organized and doing business in the State of California.
2. Frasure was employed by UP for over thirty years as a switchman, brakeman, and conductor working…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. KubrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Chatham v. CSX Transp., Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1993
- National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. KrouseDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- Depczynski v. Adsco/Farrar & TreftsNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Monarch v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co.California Court of Appeal · 1999
- Polizzi v. NEW JERSEY TRANSIT RAILNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2003
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.