Legal Opinion
O'Neal v. Kennamer
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided April 20, 1992No. 91-7550PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
GODBOLD, Senior Circuit Judge:
This appeal concerns a conflict of laws question with respect to subrogation rights of the intervenors, Liberty Mutual and Clo-pay. It also raises the propriety of the district court’s denial of a Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment, which motion raised for the first time the contention that state law principles under which the matter was litigated and decided had been preempted by federal law.
Kevin O’Neal, a resident of Tennessee who worked for Clopay, a Tennessee employer, was injured in a truck collision in Alabama. He received disability and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- FMC Corp. v. HollidaySupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- American Home Assurance Company v. Glenn Estess & Associates, Inc., D/B/A Sales Consultants of BirminghamCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
- Lussier v. DuggerCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
- Fitts v. Minnesota Min. & Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1991
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Kevin Daryl O'neal, Plaintiff-Counterclaim-Defendant, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, and Clopay Corporation, Intervenors-Appellants v. Joe Martin Kennamer, Defendant-Cross-Claim-Defendant, W.S. Newell, Inc., Defendant-Cross-Claim Prince Trucking, a Partnership, Defendant-Counterclaim-Plaintiff-Cross-Claim Associates Insurance Company v. Lend Lease Trucks, Inc., Counterclaim-DefendantCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1992