Legal Opinion
Mendola v. Carborundum Co.
District Court, W.D. New York
Decided December 20, 1938No. 11PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KNIGHT, District Judge.
The complaint herein contains two alleged causes of action; one based upon violation of the Labor Law of the State of New York (Consol.Laws, c. 31), and the other upon negligence. The defendant now moves to dismiss the second cause of action upon the ground that it is barred by the Statute of Limitations, Civil Practice Act, § 49, subd. 6, and it also moves to require the plaintiff to make the complaint more- definite in certain respects. These motions should be considered together.
The complaint alleges: “There was no injurious exposure after July, 1935.” It does not…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Schmidt v. Merchants Despatch Transportation Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1936
- Pieczonka v. Pullman Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
3Cited by7 opinions
- Tahir Erk v. Glenn L. Martin Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1941
- Alden-Rochelle, Inc. v. American Society of Composers, Authors & PublishersDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1942
- Schenley Distillers Corporation v. RenkenDistrict Court, E.D. South Carolina · 1940
- Adams v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.District Court, D. Idaho · 1984
- Kisella v. DunnNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1954
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.