Legal Opinion
Frey v. Woodard
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 18, 1984No. Civ. A. Nos. 79-1458, 80-1533PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
TROUTMAN, District Judge.
In our Memorandum and Order of April 12, 1983, 565 F.Supp. 386, we granted summary judgment on behalf of defendants Joe McCracken and the United States of America. In so doing, we determined that, as a matter of law,
North Carolina would not impose liability upon a driver who indicates to pedestrians that they may proceed across his lane of traffic and [, upon so proceeding,] are subsequently injured in an adjacent lane. (Memorandum at p. 3)
Hence, plaintiffs’ presence on the highway, rather than the truck’s surge or lurch, was the cause of the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Dendy v. WatkinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- Blake v. MallardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Landini v. SteelmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Jenkins v. ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Woodrow and Betty Frey v. Gerald Dean Woodard, Joe McCracken and the United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984