Stokke v. Southern Pac. Co.
| Citation | 169 F.2d 42 |
| Decision Date | 09 August 1948 |
| Docket Number | No. 3640.,3640. |
| Parties | STOKKE et ux. v. SOUTHERN PAC. CO. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
William A. Sloan, of Albuquerque, N. M. (Pearce C. Rodey, Don L. Dickason, Frank M. Mims, and Jackson G. Akin, all of Albuquerque, N. M., on the brief), for appellants.
L. C. White, of Santa Fe, N. M., for appellee.
Before BRATTON, HUXMAN, and MURRAH, Circuit Judges.
This is an action by John Stokke and wife, Emma Stokke, citizens of Washington, against Southern Pacific Company, a railroad corporation organized under the laws of Kentucky and engaged in business in California, Oregon, New Mexico, and elsewhere, to recover damages for personal injuries suffered by plaintiff Emma Stokke while boarding a passenger train of defendant at Davis, California. The action was filed in the state court in New Mexico and was removed to the United States Court for that state. By answer, the defendant pleaded limitations, forum non conviens, and res judicata. The court entered judgment dismissing the action on each and all of the several defenses pleaded in the answer; and plaintiffs appealed.
Taking up the question of res judicata, an identical action between the same parties was filed in the state court in Oregon and was removed to the United States Court for that state. The defendant answered, pleading that the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted plaintiffs; that plaintiff Emma Stokke was guilty of contributory negligence; and that the right of action was barred by limitations. Plaintiffs filed a motion to dismiss the action without prejudice, and defendant filed a motion for summary judgment on the ground that it affirmatively appeared from all of the pleadings that it was entitled to such judgment as a matter of law. The court entered summary judgment in favor of the defendant and against plaintiffs. No appeal was taken and the judgment became final. Copies of the complaint, the answer, and the judgment in that case were attached to the answer in this case. Appellants concede that the action in Oregon was identical with this action, concede that the judgment was entered, and concede that it became final. But they contend that the former action was dismissed on the ground that it was barred by limitations and that therefore the judgment does not bar this action under the doctrine of res judicata. It is the general rule that a judgment dismissing an action on the ground that it is barred by limitations merely determines that the legal remedy for the enforcement of the right of action is barred in that forum; that it does not extinguish the right; and that it therefore does not constitute res judicata which forecloses the maintaining of a subsequent action in another state where the right is not barred by local law. Warner v. Buffalo Drydock Co., 2 Cir., 67 F.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Igal v. Brightstar Information Technology
...v. Low, 478 F.2d 360, 363 (2d Cir.1973); Titus v. Wells Fargo Bank & Union Trust, 134 F.2d 223, 224 (5th Cir. 1943); Stokke v. S. Pac. Co., 169 F.2d 42, 43 (10th Cir.1948); United States v. Lyman, 125 F.2d 67, 70 (1st Cir. 1942); Warner v. Buffalo Drydock Co., 67 F.2d 540, 541 (2d Cir. 10. ......
-
Cosgrove v. Kan. Dep't of Soc.
...F.3d 217, 1997 WL 537742, *3 (10th Cir.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1132, 118 S.Ct. 1088, 140 L.Ed.2d 144 (1998); Stokke v. Southern Pac. Co., 169 F.2d 42, 43 (10th Cir.1948). When plaintiff failed to properly docket his appeal from the state court's dismissal in 04–CV–08393, the Johnson C......
-
Wright Mach. Corp. v. Seaman-Andwall Corp., SEAMAN-ANDWALL
...must be given res judicata effect in any subsequent proceeding involving the same parties and the same claim. See Stokke v. Southern Pac. Co., 169 F.2d 42 (10th Cir. 1948); Small Business Admn. v. Taubman, 459 F.2d 991 (9th Cir. 1972); Sopp v. Gehrlein, 236 F.Supp. 823, 825 (W.D.Pa.1964); H......
-
Rhoades v. Wright
...Am.Jur.2d, Judgments, § 1226.24 Titus v. Wells Fargo Bank and Union Trust Company, 134 F.2d 223 (5th Cir. 1943); Stokke v. Southern Pacific Company, 169 F.2d 42 (10th Cir. 1948); Western Coal and Mineral Company v. Jones, 27 Cal.2d 819, 167 P.2d 719 (Calif.1946).25 See Wood & Selick v. Comp......