Legal Opinion
Feeney v. Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 11, 1988No. 87 Civ. 9256(RJW)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROBERT J. WARD, District Judge.
Plaintiff, an employee of the Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation (“PATH”), has brought this action against the railroad pursuant to the Federal Employer’s Liability Act (“FELA”), 45 U.S.C. § 51, the Boiler Inspection Act (“BIA”), 45 U.S.C. § 22, and the Safety Appliance Act (“SAA”), 45 U.S.C. § 1, for injuries arising from PATH’S alleged negligence in maintaining safe working conditions. Defendant moves for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c), Fed.R.Civ.P. For the reasons that follow, defendant’s motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
On or about…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. HaldermanSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Edelman v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Bell v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Quern v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Hans v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Patrick Feeney v. Port Authority Trans-Hudson CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
- Automobile Club of New York, Inc. v. Port Authority of New York & New JerseyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1989
- John Leadbeater v. Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation. Leonardo Benitez v. Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation. Appeal of Leonardo BenitezCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- Marley Co. v. Boston Old Colony InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1989