Legal Opinion
Toran v. New York, N. H. & H. R.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided November 19, 1952No. Civ. A. 52-314PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WYZANSKI, District Judge.
Defendant moves for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff’s action has not been timely brought.
March 20, 1952 plaintiff filed a complaint alleging that he, a railroad machinist, was injured August 16, 1947, in the course of his employment, by defendant railroad, and that he was entitled to recover under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S. C.A. § 51 et seq. Defendant’s answer pleaded that plaintiff is not entitled to maintain this action because he had not complied with 52 Stat. 1404, 45 U.S.C.A. § 56, which provides that .“No action shall be…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Dice v. Akron, Canton & Youngstown RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Engel v. DavenportSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Campbell v. HaverhillSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- A. J. Phillips Co. v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Midstate Horticultural Co. v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Glus v. Brooklyn Eastern District TerminalSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Chandlee v. ShockleyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1959
- Holland v. EatonMichigan Supreme Court · 1964
- Reat v. Illinois Central RailroadAppellate Court of Illinois · 1964
- Carr-Consolidated Biscuit Co. v. MooreDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1954
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.