Legal Opinion

Furlong v. Stichman

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided November 25, 1959PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

METZNER, District Judge.

Plaintiff moves for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A. The cause of action is predicated upon the Federal Employers’ Liability Act and federal law applies.

It appears from the complaint, the answers to the notice to admit (Rule 36) and plaintiff’s affidavit in support of this motion that a train owned and operated by defendant on which plaintiff was a conductor ran into another train owned and operated by defendant. The latter' train was at a halt at the time of impact and plaintiff was not operating the controls of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sartor v. Arkansas Natural Gas Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. Sweeney v. ErvingSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  3. George Foltis, Inc. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1941
  4. San Juan Light & Transit Co. v. RequenaSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  5. Ramsouer v. Midland Valley R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1943

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Eleanora B. Cobb Rogers v. Peabody Coal CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1965
  2. Foley v. MatulewiczMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1984
  3. Verplank v. Commercial BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1969
  4. Gene W. Gunn v. International Harvester CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1966
  5. Tsesmelys v. Dublin Truck Leasing Corp.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1976

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API