679 F.2d 336 (3rd Cir. 1982), 81-2842, Seese v. Volkswagenwerk, A.G.
|Citation:||679 F.2d 336|
|Party Name:||Barry Lynn SEESE, Reinaldo Irizarry, Jr., Martin Ramos and Marcos Torres, Administrator for the estate of Jose Torres, Deceased, Appellees, v. VOLKSWAGENWERK, A.G., a West German Corporation and Volkswagen of America, Inc., a New Jersey Corporation, Appellants.|
|Case Date:||June 04, 1982|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit|
Submitted Under Third Circuit Rule 12(6) May 24, 1982.
John T. Dolan, David J. Sheehan, John H. Klock, Crummy, Del Deo, Dolan & Purcell, Newark, N. J., for appellants; Herzfeld & Rubin, P. C., New York City, of counsel.
Harold Ungar, John J. Buckley, Jr., Williams & Connolly, Washington, D. C., for appellees; Henry H. Wallace, Wallace, Chapas & Gravina, Pittsburgh, Pa., of counsel.
Before SEITZ, Chief Judge, and SLOVITER and BECKER, Circuit Judges.
OPINION OF THE COURT
A car accident in North Carolina gave rise to this diversity case brought in the District Court for the District of New Jersey. The jury awarded plaintiffs-appellees a verdict for nearly $2 million on two claims, one based on a theory of strict liability and the other based on a theory of negligence in failing to design a crashworthy vehicle. On appeal, this court held that the law of North Carolina, which controls this case, would not recognize the strict liability cause of action, although it would recognize the negligence cause of action. See Seese v. Volkswagenwerk, A.G., 648 F.2d 833 (3d Cir. 1981). This court denied defendants' petition for rehearing on June 26, 1981. On August 14, 1981, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled that North Carolina would not recognize the negligence theory. See Wilson v. Ford Motor Co., 656 F.2d 960 (4th Cir. 1981) (per curiam). On August 18, defendants moved for stay of mandate and for leave to file a second petition for rehearing, relying on Wilson. This court denied the motions. The United States Supreme Court denied defendants' petition for certiorari on October 5, 1981. Volkswagenwerk, A.G. v. Seese, 102 S.Ct. 330 (1981). This court on October 15 issued its mandate affirming the judgment of the district court.
On October 15, defendants returned to the district court and moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(6) for relief from the judgment, relying on Wilson. The district court denied the motion, and...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP