Legal Opinion
Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Providence & Worcester Co.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided June 4, 1982No. Civ. A. 77-445PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LATCHUM, Chief Judge.
Consolidated Rail Corporation (“Conrail”) brought this civil action on November 15, 1977, against the defendant, Providence & Worcester Company (“P&W”), seeking to recover certain interline freight revenues allegedly being unlawfully withheld by P&W. (Docket Item [“D.I.”] 1.) 1 Count I of the complaint is based on P&W’s alleged breach of four related agreements 2 wherein P&W and The Penn Central Transportation Company 3 (“Penn Central”) agreed to apportion joint freight revenues according to specified divisional bases. Count II is based on P&W’s alleged breach of…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Mellon Bank, N.A. v. Aetna Business Credit, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- Robert Industries, Inc. v. SpenceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1973
- SPIRES Et Ux. v. Hanover Fire Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
- Terminal Railroad Ass'n v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- College Watercolor Group, Inc. v. William H. Newbauer, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Best Canvas Products & Supplies, Inc. v. Ploof Truck Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1983
- Best Canvas Products & Supplies, Inc., D/B/A Best Canvas Products, Co. v. Ploof Truck Lines, Inc., Defendant/plaintiff-In-Counterclaim v. Farrington Texal, Division of Norton Company, Defendant-In-CounterclaimCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1983