Legal Opinion

Finnegan v. Monongahela Connecting Railroad

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 8, 1954No. Appeals, Nos. 95 and 130PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by Mr.

Justice Chidsey,

This action to recover damages for personal injuries under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, Act of April 22, 1908, c. 149, 35 Stat. 65, as amended, 45 U.S.C.A. §51, was instituted and tried in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. There are two appeals. No. 95 is the appeal of the Monongahela Connecting Railroad Company, defendant in the action, from the order of the court en banc refusing to enter *65judgment non obstante veredicto. No. 130 is the appeal of Thomas E. Finnegan, plaintiff in the action, from the order of the court en banc awarding a new…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Lavender v. KurnSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  3. Brady v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  4. Bailey v. Central Vermont Railway, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1943
  5. Toledo, St. Louis & Western Railroad v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1928

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Strobel v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
  2. Burch v. Reading CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1956
  3. Howard v. MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANYSupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
  4. Okvat v. Penn Central Transportation Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1977
  5. Frankiewicz v. Reading Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1972

2 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