Legal Opinion
Rohner Gehrig Company, Inc. v. Tri-State Motor Transit
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided February 15, 1991No. 89-6246PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FILEMON B. VELA, District Judge:
Tri-State Motor Transit (Tri-State) appeals a grant of summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff Rohner-Gehrig (Roh-ner) and a denial of its motion for summary judgment. Based upon the record before us we find that the district court did not have sufficient grounds to grant Rohner summary judgment but was warranted in denying Tri-State’s motion for summary judgment. We therefore REVERSE in part and AFFIRM in part.
I. The Facts.
When it absolutely positively has to get there.
In 1906, Congress enacted the Carmack Amendment (now at 49 U.S.C. § 11707 *1120[Supp.1990])…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad v. NothnagleSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Edward and Nancy Hughes v. United Van Lines, Inc., and 291 Sisser Brothers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- Juliet M. D. Anton v. Greyhound Van Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1978
- Texas Commerce Bank-Fort Worth, N.A., Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. United States of America, Defendant-Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990
- Caten v. Salt City Movers & Storage Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Dan Barclay, Inc. v. Stewart & Stevenson Services, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1991
- Rohner Gehrig Company, Inc. v. Tri-State Motor TransitCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
- Banos v. Eckerd Corp.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1998
- Rohner Gehrig Company, Inc. v. Tri-State Motor TransitCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
- Rohner Gehrig Company, Inc. v. Tri-State Motor TransitCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1991
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.