Legal Opinion
Edward E. Pinkham v. Maine Central Railroad Company
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided May 15, 1989No. 88-1932PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FUSTE, District Judge.
Plaintiff-appellant Edward Pinkham suffered personal injuries while attempting to dismount a locomotive owned by the defendant-appellee, Maine Central Railroad (“Maine Central”). Pinkham based his two-count suit for damages on the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. § 51 et seq., and on the Boiler Inspection Act, 45 U.S.C. § 23. After all the evidence the district court dismissed the latter claim and submitted the former to the jury, which, on the theory of comparative negligence, determined that appellant was 85% responsible for his injuries while appellee was…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- United States v. YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- United States v. SerranoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
- E.J. Wilson, Dearest Davis, and Cassandra Linder, Plaintiffs v. Roland AttawayCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
- United States v. Edwin Charles Fortes, Jr., United States of America v. Sandra Elaine JemisonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1980
- Willard Crimm v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1984
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Dennis Deans v. Csx Transportation, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1998
- Kowalski v. GagneCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
- McGrath v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- Carolyn Crockett v. The Long Island RailroadCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Oscar J. Fernandez v. Francis T. LeonardCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1992
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.