Legal Opinion

Neal v. Toyota Motor Corp.

District Court, N.D. Georgia

Decided June 9, 1993No. 1:91-cr-00063PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

HAROLD L. MURPHY, District Judge.

These consolidated personal injury cases are before the Court on Defendant Toyota Motor Corporation’s Renewal of its Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, Toyota Motor Corporation’s Motion for a New Trial/Remittitur and Plaintiffs’ Motion to File a Supplemental Brief. 1 Defendant Toyota Motor Corporation (“TMC” or Defendant) 2 renews its Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law because it contends that this case is governed by Georgia’s Open and Obvious Danger Doctrine. Defendant claims that the injuries suffered by Plaintiffs were caused by an open and…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Burlington Northern Railroad v. WoodsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Charles Franklin Westbrook, Jr., Pilot Point Ready-Mix, Inc., Intervenor-Appellee v. General Tire and Rubber Company, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
  4. McWhorter v. City of BirminghamCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
  5. BankAtlantic v. Blythe Eastman Paine Webber, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1992

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bilenky v. Ryobi Technologies, Inc.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2015
  2. Federal Deposit Insurance v. StahlDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1994
  3. RICHARDSON v. FCA US LLCDistrict Court, M.D. Georgia · 2022

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

Powered by the Exa API