The Hertz Corporation v. Donald Cox and Sarah C. Crowe
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
KRENTZMAN, District Judge:
We reverse and remand for reasons set out more fully below.
In a previous consideration of this case this court considered the question of whether or not the Hertz Corporation, which engages in the business of renting automobiles, could be dismissed from the action, by way of summary judgment on the grounds that Hertz was not present either in person or through an actual agency. At that time this court stated:
“In dismissing the complaint against the Hertz Corporation it is obvious that the trial court did so on the theory that the transaction between Cox and his…
2Cases cited53 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Myzel v. FieldsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1967
- Brown v. Ragsdale Motor Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1941
- King Hardware Co. v. EnnisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
- Bagley v. Firestone Tire & Rubber CompanyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Capaci v. Katz & Besthoff, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
- Paulsen v. Abbott Labs.District Court, E.D. Illinois · 2019
- WESI, LLC v. Compass Environmental, Inc.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 2007
- Grizzle v. Guarantee InsuranceDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1984
- Management Science America, Inc. v. NCR Corp.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 1991
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.