Legal Opinion
Cheatham v. Thurston Motor Lines
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided May 12, 1986No. C3-83-1133PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ENTRY GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION IN LIMINE
RICE, District Judge.
This case is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine (Doc. # 176), which seeks to have this Court order that evidence of the use or non-use of seat belts or other types of restraints by the Plaintiffs while in the van at the time of the collision which is the subject of this suit is inadmissible at trial. This Court has previously determined that Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendants Plunkett and Thurston Motor Lines are governed by the law of Tennessee and that the product liability claims in this suit…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Clutter v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1981
- Jennifer Kay Brumit Mathis and Her Husband, Barry L. Mathis, Plaintiffs v. Eli Lilly and CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
- Dennis C. Sours v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
- Stallcup v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1970
- Roberts v. BohnOhio Court of Appeals · 1971
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Meyer v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1991
- MacDonald v. General Motors Corp.District Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1992
- Pasternak v. AchornDistrict Court, D. Maine · 1988
- Meyer v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1991