Legal Opinion
Carlisle v. Consolidated Rail Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 23, 1992No. Civ. A. 88-8752PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
GAWTHROP, District Judge.
Plaintiff, Alan Carlisle, filed this suit under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. § 51, et seq. (“FELA”), against Consolidated Rail Corporation (“Conrail”), his former employer, alleging negligent infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff claimed that Conrail breached its non-dele-gable duty to provide him with a safe place to work by requiring him to work under unreasonably dangerous conditions, with foreseeable hazards to his health. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff in the amount of $386,500, and Conrail now…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Montgomery Ward & Co. v. DuncanSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Beech Aircraft Corp. v. RaineySupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway v. BuellSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Alan Carlisle v. Consolidated Rail CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Riddle v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1993
- Carlisle (Alan) v. Consolidated Rail CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- Smithgall v. Trustees of the University of PennsylvaniaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994