Legal Opinion

Christiansen v. Union Pacific Railroad

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided May 4, 2006No. 20040991-CAPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

AMENDED OPINION 1

DAVIS, Judge:

¶ 1 Carol Christiansen appeals the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Union Pacific Railroad Company (Union Pacific), ruling that Christiansen’s claim under the Federal Employer’s Liability Act (FELA) was barred by the applicable three-year statute of limitations. See 45 U.S.C. § 56 (1986). Union Pacific cross-appeals, arguing that even if the trial court erred in determining Christiansen’s claim was time-barred, the trial court should have granted its motion for summary judgment because Christiansen has not provided sufficient evidence to send his case…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. United States v. KubrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. Rogers v. Missouri Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  5. Gallick v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1963

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Accesslex Institute v. PhilpotCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2023
  2. Levitt v. Iasis Healthcare Holdings Inc.Court of Appeals of Utah · 2019

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API