Legal Opinion

Murray v. United States

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided February 20, 1985No. Civ. A. 84-1572PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM and ORDER

SHAPIRO, District Judge.

This is an action pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b) and § 2671 et seq. Plaintiffs allege that on or about April 1, 1981, Arnett Murray slipped and fell at the entranceway to the Post Office at 441 First Avenue, Parkesburg, Pennsylvania. Plaintiffs further allege that Arnett Murray’s claim for personal injuries on the required Form 95 was timely presented to the Postal Service and improperly denied. The Government contends that no claim was timely received, so denial was appropriate. Plaintiffs appeal from this…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. KubrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Bailey v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
  3. House v. Mine Safety Appliances Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1978
  4. Susanin v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1983

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Louis H. Manko, Appellee/cross-Appellant v. United States of America, Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1987
  2. Wozniak v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1988
  3. Frantz v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1992
  4. Bellecourt v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1992
  5. Dugan v. Coastal Industries, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2000

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API