Legal Opinion
Barger v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided November 15, 1990No. 90AP-402PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McCormac, Judge.
Plaintiff-appellant, Larry Barger, appeals from the judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas granting summary judgment in favor of defendant-appellee, Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, and raises the following assignments of error:
“I. The trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of appellee since numerous material issues existed.
“A. Summary judgment may not usurp a party’s right to trial where conflicting material facts exist.
“B. Negligence, proximate cause, discernibility, audibility of the train, unreliability of appellee’s flasher system, and…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. PaulSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Fidelity Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. De La CuestaSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Norris v. Ohio Standard Oil Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1982
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Joshua Nye and Judy Ramirez v. Csx Transportation, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2006
- Glick v. MarlerOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
- Tardy v. Norfolk Southern Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1995
- Cates v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1995
- Lintner v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1997
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.