Kennedy v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Civ. A. No. 12917.
Decision Date | 12 January 1959 |
Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 12917. |
Citation | 169 F. Supp. 406 |
Parties | John P. KENNEDY, Plaintiff, v. PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant and Third Party Plaintiff. United States Steel Corporation, Third Party Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
James P. McArdle, Pittsburgh, Pa.; John M. Feeney, Jr., Pittsburgh, Pa., of counsel, for plaintiff.
Pringle, Bredin & Martin, Reed, Smith, Shaw & McClay, Pittsburgh, Pa.; Bruce R. Martin and Ira R. Hill, Pittsburgh, Pa., of counsel, for defendant.
Counsel for the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, the defendant and third party plaintiff has in his brief set forth a succinct account of the jury's findings. His statement is:
However, a more detailed account is desirable as pointing up the present issues which this court must decide. Counsel for the third party defendant has given a detailed history of the case in his brief, which has been largely adopted here. He says:
Following the jury verdict, this court directed that judgment be entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the Pennsylvania Railroad Company. In the third party action, judgment was entered in favor of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company and against the United States Steel Corporation in the full amount of the judgment and costs entered in favor of the plaintiff against the defendant. Steel filed a timely motion for a new trial. It also filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict in accordance with its motion for a directed verdict. However, as pointed out in Railroad's brief, the latter motion was not timely. Nevertheless, had it been timely, it would not have been granted, and the motion for a new trial must be denied.
The issues were left to the jury in a special verdict containing six interrogatories. In...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Laiho v. Consolidated Rail Corp.
...law or implied indemnity. See Goulette v. Babcock, 153 Vt. 650, 571 A.2d 74, 75 (1990) (common law indemnity); Kennedy v. Pennsylvania R.R. Co., 169 F.Supp. 406 (W.D.Pa.1959) (same); Falk v. Crystal Hall, Inc. 200 Misc. 979, 105 N.Y.S.2d 66, 70 (N.Y.Sup.Ct.1951) (same); Bedal v. Hallack & H......
-
Payne v. Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company
...2 L.Ed.2d 799 (1958); Chicago Great Western Railway Company v. Casura, 234 F.2d 441, 447 (8 Cir., 1956); Kennedy v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company, 169 F.Supp. 406, 410 (W.D.Pa., 1959). When defendant sent a boxcar on which Payne was properly riding onto a spur track containing a pile of ash......
-
Nivens v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company, 28251.
...This duty involves a wholly independent inquiry; the distinction is well illustrated by the following case. In Kennedy v. Pennsylvania R. R., 169 F.Supp. 406 (W.D.Pa.1959), a jury held the railroad liable for damages to the plaintiff for injuries he sustained in a derailment, based upon its......
-
Schrier v. Indiana Harbor Belt R. Co.
...care to discover the unsafeness and use ordinary care to have it made into a reasonably safe place. In Kennedy v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co. (W.D.Pa.1959), 169 F.Supp. 406, a jury held the railroad liable under FELA for damages to the plaintiff for injuries he sustained in a derailment, base......