Legal Opinion

Daniels v. Beryllium Corporation

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided November 30, 1962No. 24953PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FREEDMAN, District Judge.

Defendant has moved for complete or partial summary judgment under Rule 56. The question presented is the application of the statute of limitations to a so-called “continuing tort” by the defendant and the effect thereon of the plaintiffs’ definitive ascertainment of a resulting disease during the continuance of the tort.

Plaintiffs are the injured wife and her husband. The facts before us, drawn from the complaint and answer, and answers to interrogatories, are these: As a result of defendant’s contamination of the atmosphere in the vicinity of its manufacturing plant…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  3. Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  4. Bailey v. GloverSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
  5. Ayers v. MorganSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Cathcart v. Keene Industrial InsulationSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  2. Dalton v. Dow Chemical Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
  3. Anderson v. W.R. Grace & Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1986
  4. The Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corporation, the Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1967
  5. Staiano v. Johns-Manville Corp.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

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

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

Powered by the Exa API