Tepler v. Frick
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
EDELSTEIN, District Judge.
The amended complaint alleges at length a monopoly on the part of organized professional baseball, and attempts to bring under the anti-trust laws what is essentially an action for personal injury to the plaintiff sustained while he was employed as a player. In so far as I have been able to analyze the involved complaint, the first cause of action set forth must be, if anything, a common-law tort action based on negligence, and since the injury is alleged to have occurred in 1944, the statute of limitations has run. The remaining four causes of action are for treble…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hamman v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Montana · 1967
- Tepler v. FrickCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1953
- Tepler v. FrickCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1953