Kleinschmidt v. Universal Seafood Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
LUONGO, District Judge.
Before us are defendants’ motions1 to dismiss portions of plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a cause of action and as barred by the Statute of Limitations.
On March 23, 1961, various members of the Kleinschmidt family filed a complaint in twenty-eight counts against defendants for injuries and, in one case, death resulting from allegedly poisoned fish prepared and sold by defendants. The motions before us are directed only to the first eight counts of the complaint, four counts by Margaret Kleinschmidt as Administratrix ad Prosequendum, and four counts by…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Foley v. the Pittsburgh-Des Moines Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Wells v. Simonds Abrasive Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Rosenzweig v. HellerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1930
- Moran v. Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1948
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Carney v. BarnettDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1967
- Kern v. KoganNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1967
- Gallick v. United StatesDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1982
- Myelle v. American Cyanamid Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1995
- Chiasson v. R. E. A. Express Co.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 1966