Legal Opinion
Ledford v. Central Medical Pavilion, Inc.
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided June 16, 1981No. Civ. A. No. 79-1480PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WEBER, Chief Judge.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
In a status conference in this case it was established plaintiffs’ damages had been paid in a substantial degree by Workmen’s Compensation Insurance. Thus, it was the insurance carrier and not the nominal plaintiffs which would receive a substantial share of the recovery.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a) says:
Every action shall be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest... No action shall be dismissed on the ground that it is not prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest until a reasonable time has been allowed after objection…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
3Cited by6 opinions
- Reliance Insurance v. Richmond MacHine Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Hancotte v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1982
- Hamme, David B. v. Dreis & Krump Manufacturing Company v. Cole Business Furniture, Division of Litton Business Systems, Inc., Third Party Dries & Krump Manufacturing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1983
- Hamme v. Dreis & Krump Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
- Kelly v. Carborundum Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.