Legal Opinion
Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Ritter
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided March 27, 2008No. Civil Action 07-1370 (RMU), 07-1371(RMU)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Granting the Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss
RICARDO M. URBINA, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
The plaintiff, Consolidated Rail Corporation (“Conrail”), hauls these cases before the court seeking declaratory relief under the Regional Rail Reorganization Act of 1973 (“Rail Act”), 45 U.S.C. §§ 701 et seq., as amended by the Northeast Rail Service Act of 1981 (“NRSA”), 45 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq. Specifically, Conrail requests that the court enter an order declaring that the Rail Act proscribes successor liability for personal injury claims stemming from conduct prior to Conrail’s…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De GuineeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Consolidated Rail Corp. v. RAY, EX REL. BOYDDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- Consolidated Rail Corp. v. RitterDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- Consolidated Rail Corporation v. RayDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010