Legal Opinion
Matusiak v. Pennsylvania Railroad
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided October 4, 1955No. Civ. A. No. 131-55PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MODARELLI, District Judge.
This is a motion by the defendant under Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss the complaint on the ground that at the time of plaintiff’s alleged injuries he was not employed by the defendant-carrier, as is required under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, 45 U.S.C.A. § 51 et seq. The Act provides:
“Every common carrier by railroad while engaging in [interstate or foreign] commerce * * * shall be liable in damages to any person suffering injury while he is employed by such carrier in such commerce * *
Rule 12(b)(6) empowers this court to dismiss a complaint which fails to state…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Frederick Hart & Co. v. Recordgraph CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1948
- Continental Collieries, Inc. v. ShoberCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
- De Loach v. Crowley's, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1942
- Drago v. Central RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1919
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RailroadDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1959