Legal Opinion
Murray v. New York Central Railroad Company
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 5, 1959PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMAS F. MURPHY, District. Judge.
This action under the Jones Act, 46, U.S.C.A. § 688, was tried to a jury which returned a verdict of $75,000. By agreement of counsel plaintiff’s claim for maintenance and cure was reserved to-the court, and the court also reserved decision on defendant’s motion for limitation of liability, 46 U.S.C.A. § 183 et. seq., pleaded in its answer as a partial defense.
The first problem presented by the defense of limitation is occasioned by the-time element involved and by the fact, that there was only one claim and only-one person injured.
It was stipulated by the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Richardson v. HarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Karl Weiss, Jr. v. Central Railroad Company of New JerseyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
- Tankers v. Steamtug Long BranchCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1958
- Albert Reardon v. California Tanker CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1958
- Nevelin W. Wilson, Libelant-Appellant v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Christopher Murray v. New York Central Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- Doughty v. Nebel Towing Co.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1967
- In Re Williams Marine Construction & Services, Inc.District Court, M.D. Florida · 2004