Hartwell v. Piper Aircraft Corporation
| Decision Date | 03 January 1951 |
| Docket Number | No. 10299.,10299. |
| Parties | Shirley W. HARTWELL, Appellant, v. PIPER AIRCRAFT CORPORATION. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Alton S. Bradford, Washington, D. C., (A. Slater Clarke, Washington, D. C., Wallace G. Moser, Scranton, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.
Walter W. Harris, Scranton, Pa., (O'Malley, Harris, Harris & Warren, Scranton, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.
Before BIGGS, Chief Judge, and GOODRICH and KALODNER, Circuit Judges.
This is an action brought in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania seeking to recover damages for an alleged death by wrongful act. The operative facts occurred in Florida. The action was brought within the two-year period allowed by the Florida statute, F.S.A. § 95.11, but later than the one-year period given by the Pennsylvania statute, 12 P.S. § 1603.
In this type of situation where a federal court has jurisdiction by diversity only we take our conflict of laws rule from the state in which the action is brought. Klaxon Company v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co., Inc., 1941, 313 U.S. 487, 61 S.Ct. 1020, 85 L.Ed. 1477. If the state declares the maintenance of such an action contrary to its local public policy that declaration must be followed by us. Griffin v. McCoach, 1941, 313 U.S. 498, 61 S.Ct. 1023, 85 L.Ed. 1481. The Pennsylvania court has spoken in this situation. Rosenzweig v. Heller, 1931, 302 Pa. 279, 153 A. 346, establishes the proposition that the suit for the foreign death by wrongful act, in addition to being brought within the time given by the law of the place of accident, must also conform to the time limit set by the Pennsylvania statute. This proposition was reiterated in Foley v. Pittsburgh-Des Moines Co., 363 Pa. 1, 68 A.2d 517. The District Judge was correct in entering judgment for the defendant. Accordingly it will be affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Prince v. Trustees of University of Pennsylvania
...conflict of law rules. Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Elec. Mfg. Co., 313 U.S. 487, 61 S.Ct. 1020, 85 L.Ed. 1477 (1941); Hartwell v. Piper Aircraft Corp., 186 F.2d 29 (3rd Cir. 1951). Both the plaintiff and the defendant University agree that the case of Griffith v. United Air Lines, supra, which re......
-
Natale v. Upjohn Company, Civ. A. No. 2841.
...195 F.2d 814 (1952), aff'd, 345 U.S. 514 (1953); Hartwell v. Piper Aircraft Corporation, 92 F.Supp. 271 (M.D.Pa.1950), aff'd, 186 F.2d 29 (3rd Cir. 1951); Rosenzweig v. Heller, 302 Pa. 279, 153 A. 346 6 As will later appear, it is not important for present purposes to determine which of the......
-
Allison v. Mennonite Publications Board
...§ 545; Griffin v. McCoach, 313 U.S. 498, 61 S.Ct. 1023, 85 L.Ed. 1481; Hughes v. Lucker, 3 Cir., 174 F.2d 285; Hartwell v. Piper Aircraft Corp., 3 Cir., 186 F.2d 29; Magee v. McNany, D.C., 10 F.R.D. 5, Accordingly, I must conclude that the law of Pennsylvania and Missouri, the locale wherei......
-
Natale v. Upjohn Company
...Company v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co., Inc., 313 U.S. 487, 61 S.Ct. 1020, 85 L.Ed. 1477 (1941); Hartwell v. Piper Aircraft Corporation, 186 F.2d 29, 30 (3 Cir. 1951). The Delaware conflict rule is incorporated in its Borrowing Statute, 10 Del.C. § 8120, which became effective April ......