Sylvester v. Messler
| Decision Date | 10 September 1965 |
| Docket Number | 16107.,No. 16106,16106 |
| Citation | 351 F.2d 472 |
| Parties | Madeline SYLVESTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lorraine I. MESSLER, Administratrix of the Estate of Adeline Elizabeth Houghton, Deceased, Defendant-Appellee. Maude OLDFIELD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lorraine MESSLER, Administratrix of the Estate of Adeline Elizabeth Houghton, Deceased, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Eric E. Zisman, Detroit, Mich., for appellants.
John A. Ashton, Detroit, Mich., Eggenberger, Eggenberger & Ashton, Detroit, Mich., on brief, for appellee.
Before O'SULLIVAN and EDWARDS, Circuit Judges, and MATHES, Senior District Judge.*
These are appeals from dismissal of plaintiffs-appellants' complaints in diversity actions resulting from an automobile accident. The United States District Judge dismissed these suits on motion because of plaintiffs' failure to comply with the time and service requirements of the Michigan Statute of Limitations, Mich.Stat.Ann., 1962 Rev., §§ 27A.5805 and 27A.5856.
The District Judge held that Ragan v. Merchants Transfer & Warehouse Co., 337 U.S. 530, 69 S.Ct. 1233, 93 L.Ed. 1520 (1949), mandated application of the state limitation provisions cited above. We agree with Judge Kaess' brief but well-reasoned opinion, Sylvester et al. v. Messler, 246 F.Supp. 1 (E.D.Mich. 1964).
At oral argument and by supplemental briefs, appellants suggested to this court, however, that a United States Supreme Court case decided a year after the District Court opinion referred to above had overruled the Ragan case. We have examined the opinion of Chief Justice Warren in Hanna v. Plumer, 380 U.S. 460, 85 S.Ct. 1136, 14 L.Ed.2d 8 (1965), and conclude that although it refers to and cites Ragan, it carefully refrains from overruling same. The instant case appears to us to be directly governed by Ragan.
Affirmed.
William C. Mathes, sitting by designation from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Walko Corp. v. Burger Chef Systems, Inc.
...(8th Cir. 1966) (casting doubt on Ragan but refusing to depart from it); Sylvester v. Messler, 246 F.Supp. 1 (E.D.Mich.1964), aff'd, 351 F.2d 472 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 1011, 86 S.Ct. 619, 15 L.Ed.2d 526 (1965) (same). But see Witherow v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 530 F.2d 16......
-
Walker v. Armco Steel Corporation
...Anderson v. Papillion, 445 F.2d 841 (CA5 1971) (per curiam ); Groninger v. Davison, 364 F.2d 638 (CA8 1966); Sylvester v. Messler, 351 F.2d 472 (CA6 1965) (per curiam ), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 1011, 86 S.Ct. 619, 15 L.Ed.2d 526 (1966), all holding that state law controls, with Smith v. Pete......
-
Prashar v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.
...must conclude that the majority of the Supreme Court . . . felt that it was not an overruling of Ragan." See also Sylvester v. Messler, 351 F.2d 472 (6 Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 382 U.S. 1011, 86 S.Ct. 619, 15 L.Ed.2d 526 (1966); Anderson v. Phoenix of Hartford Insurance Co., 320 F.Supp. 39......
-
Benn v. Linden Crane Company, Civ. A. No. 70-542.
...courts. Anderson v. Papillion, 445 F.2d 841 (5th Cir. 1971); Groninger v. Davison, 364 F.2d 638 (8th Cir. 1966); Sylvester v. Messler, 351 F.2d 472 (6th Cir. 1965). Fortunately, I need not assess the legal viability of Ragan as that case is inapposite to the instant case. In view of this de......
-
Walker v. Armco Steel Corporation: the Jurisprudence of Federal Rule 3
...v. Papillion, 445 F.2d 841 (5th Cir. 1971) (per curiam); Groninger v. Davison, 364 F.2d 638 (8th Cir. 1966); Sylvester v. Messier, 351 F.2d 472 (6th Cir. 1965) {per curiam), cert, denied, 382 U.S. 1011 (1962). Still other courts acknowledged that Ragan was valid, but were able to distinguis......