Legal Opinion
Barth v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Co.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided September 1, 1987No. C-85-20534 RPAPublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REVISED ORDER RE MOTION TO DISMISS
AGUILAR, District Judge.
The defendant Firestone Tire and Rubber Company (“Firestone”) brings this motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (the “Complaint”) in this putative class action pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). The defendant argues that the plaintiffs claims here are precluded by the exclusivity provisions of the California Workers’ Compensation system. Alternatively, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
The Court must state, preliminarily, that this case presents troubling and…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Jenkins v. McKeithenSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. Interstate Commerce CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- T.W. Electrical Service, Inc. v. Pacific Electrical Contractors AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Unruh v. Truck Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Johns-Manville Products Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Potter v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.California Supreme Court · 1993
- German v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1995
- In Re Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. Tires ProductsDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 2001
- Werlein v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1990
- Cook v. Rockwell International Corp.District Court, D. Colorado · 1993
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.