Lawrence v. Great Northern Ry. Co.
District Court, D. Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
NORDBYE, Chief Judge.
The motions to dismiss are bottomed upon two grounds; first, that the Court has no jurisdiction of the third-party defendants because no diversity of citizenship or other grounds of federal jurisdiction exist, and second, that the third-party proceeding would involve different issues and rules of law than are involved in the original proceeding, which would render the proceedings more complicated to the prejudice of the rights of the third-party defendants.
The plaintiff, James Lawrence, Sr., a switch foreman in the employ of the defendant, Great Northern Railway Company,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- United States v. Yellow Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Duluth, Missabe & Northern Railway Co. v. McCarthySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
- Mayberry v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
- Flaherty v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
- Moncrief v. Pennsylvania R. Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1947
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- United States v. AcordCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1954
- Waylander-Peterson Co. v. Great Northern Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1953
- Montgomery County v. Valk Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1989
- John F. Kennedy v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company, and Third-Party v. United States Steel Corporation, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1960
- Bolton v. ZieglerDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1953
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.