Legal Opinion
Daniels v. Beryllium Corporation
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 16, 1964No. Civ. A. 24953PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FREEDMAN, District Judge.
This is a suit for damages brought by a husband and wife. They claim that the wife’s beryllium poisoning was caused by the contamination of the atmosphere by defendant’s operation of its manufacturing plant.
Defendant moved for “complete or partial” summary judgment under Rule 56, relying on the bar of the statute of limitations. On the record then before me it appeared that the wife resides a little more than two miles from the defendant’s plant near Reading, Pennsylvania, and has been constantly exposed to the poisoned atmosphere since some time pri- or to World War…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Smith v. Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- Ayers v. MorganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Anthony v. Koppers Co., Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- The Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corporation, the Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1967
- Acker v. PalenaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- O'brien, Ann C. v. Eli Lilly & Company E. R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. The Upjohn Company, and Winthrop Company, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
- Diamond v. New Jersey Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1968
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.