Legal Opinion
Goldberg v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad
City of New York Municipal Court
Decided January 30, 1943PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWatson, J.
Plaintiff moves for summary judgment pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice.
The motion is made upon an agreed statement of facts, hence no affidavit has been submitted. Perhaps the motion might more appropriately have been made under section 476 of the Civil Practice Act for judgment on the admissions embodied in the agreed statement; but the parties seek a determination on the merits, and no question has been raised as to the practice adopted.
*178The action is brought to recover damages for a delay of two days in the transportation of three carloads of Christmas trees from Nova…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Georgia, Florida & Alabama Railway Co. v. Blish Milling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Calveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Co. v. WoodburySupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Lewis-Simas-Jones Co. v. Southern Pacific Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1931
- News Syndicate Co. v. New York Central RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Siebert v. Erie RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
3Cited by4 opinions
- Mexican Light & Power Co. v. Texas-Mexican Ry. Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1945
- Sklaroff v. Pennsylvania R.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1950
- Carr v. Erie Lackawanna RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1972
- Miles v. Lehigh Valley RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1968