Legal Opinion

Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Maddox

District Court, D. Delaware

Decided August 18, 1987No. Civ. A. No. 86-300-JLLPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

LATCHUM, Senior District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

Consolidated Rail Corporation (“Conrail”), a Pennsylvania corporation, filed suit against James Maddox (“Maddox”), a citizen of Delaware, and J & M Construction and Demolition (“J & M Construction”),1 after Conrail settled a suit brought against it by James F. Tuerk (“Tuerk”), a Conrail employee, who was injured in an area where J & M Construction was removing track and rail pursuant to a contract with Conrail. Although Conrail is the nominal plaintiff, Lloyd’s of London (“Lloyd’s”) is the party pursuing this action, because…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Perma Research & Development Company v. Singer CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1970
  2. John Blair & Co. v. WaltonDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1969
  3. United States v. United States Casualty Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1960

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Youell v. MaddoxDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1988
  2. Ecolab Inc. v. DuBois Chemicals, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API