Legal Opinion
Fraley v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 23, 1969No. Civ. A. No. 66-415PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DUMBAULD, District Judge.
The question for decision here is whether, upon the record before us as developed after full opportunity for discovery,1 the activities of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company within the Western District of Pennsylvania are sufficiently substantial and continuous as to constitute “doing business” within the meaning of 45 U.S.C. § 562 so as to justify litigation within said district of a personal injury case arising in another State, and involving a non-resident plaintiff.
The circumstances under which a Court may properly adjudicate lawsuits against a…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Gulf Oil Corp. v. GilbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- McGee v. International Life InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Cohens v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1821
- Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Eason v. Linden Avionics, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1989
- Scott v. Fort Ord Federal Credit Union (In Re G. Weeks Securities, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1980
- Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Grand Trunk Western RailroadDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1984
- Bernardi Bros. v. Pride Manufacturing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
- MacKinnon v. St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1987
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.