Legal Opinion
Bowling v. City of Roanoke
District Court, W.D. Virginia
Decided July 26, 1983No. Civ. A. 81-0481(R)Published
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
TURK, Chief Judge.
Paulette Bowling (Bowling) brings this diversity action, see 28 U.S.C. § 1332, alleging that she was injured as a result of the negligence of defendants City of Roanoke, Virginia (Roanoke) and Piedmont Aviation, Inc. (Piedmont). This action is now before the court on Roanoke’s motions to dismiss Bowling’s complaint and Piedmont’s cross-claim on the grounds that it is entitled to governmental immunity from tort liability. For the reasons stated herein, the court denies the motions to dismiss.
The relevant facts as alleged in the complaint are as follows.…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- King v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Hoggard v. City of RichmondSupreme Court of Virginia · 1939
- Rhodes v. City of AshevilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- Virginia Electric & Power Co. v. Hampton Redevelopment & Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of Virginia · 1976
- Freeman v. City of NorfolkSupreme Court of Virginia · 1980
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.