Legal Opinion
Escareno v. Noltina Crucible & Refractory Corp.
District Court, N.D. Georgia
Decided November 30, 1993No. Civ. No. 1:92-cv-103-JECPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
CARNES, District Judge.
This case is presently before the Court on plaintiffs Motion for Substitution [53-1]. The Court has reviewed the record and the arguments of the parties and, for the reasons set out below, concludes that plaintiffs motion should be denied. Moreover, the case is dismissed for failure to substitute a party for the deceased plaintiff.
BACKGROUND
On January 22,1990, plaintiff was severely burned when a crucible in operation at plaintiffs employer burst and showered him with molten zinc. Plaintiff filed this lawsuit on January 14,1992, invoking this Court’s diversity…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Larry Bonner v. City of Prichard, AlabamaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1981
- James Boggs v. Dravo Corporation. Appeal of Rosalie B. Peterson, Administratrix of the Estate of James Boggs, DeceasedCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- Williams v. Pope Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1900
- Mallonee v. FaheyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1952
- Robbins v. National Bank of Ga.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1978
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Alejandro Escareno v. Noltina Crucible and Refractory Corporation, Carl Nolte Sohne GmbhCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1998
- Escareno v. Noltina Crucible & Refractory Corp.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 1994
- Escareno v. Noltina CrucibleCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1998
- Escareno v. Noltina CrucibleCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1998