ROSSLYN STEEL & CEMENT CO. ET AL.

v.

ETCHISON ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Lesnik v. Pub. Industrials Corp. (Davison, 144 F.2d 968 (2d Cir. 1944)
  …187. Hence Lesnik himself cannot and does not object to the pleading of the counterclaims. But even as to the cited-in defendants, liable as coconspirators jointly and severally with Lesnik, Lewis v. Ingram, 10 Cir., 57 F. 2d 463, certiorari denied 287 U.S. 614, 53 S.Ct. 16, 77 L.Ed. 533; Ellerd v. Griffith, 5 Cir., 22 F. 2d 793, the trial of the issue of conspiracy once and for all here is obviously desirable and proper unless jurisdiction over them cannot be obtained or their joinder deprives the court o…
• Tobin v. Pa. R. Co., 100 F.2d 435 (D.C. Cir. 1938)
  …y to protect its passengers therefrom. The testimony of appellant’s witnesses challenged the allegation and the only evidence upon the point contradicted it flatly. See Altemus v. Talmadge, 61 App.D.C. 148, 151, 58 F. 2d 874, 877, certiorari denied, 287 U.S. 614, 53 S.Ct. 16, 77 L.Ed. 533. The standard of care applicable in cases arising out of alleged negligence of railroad companies has been stated by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Palmer v. Warren Street Ry. Co., 206 Pa. 574, 581, 56 A. 49, 51, 52…
• Landella Kanelos v. Kettler, 406 F.2d 951 (D.C. Cir. 1968)
  …a notes 20 to 24. . Restatement (Second) of Torts § 496 E, comment C (1965). . Dougherty v. Chas. H. Tompkins Co., 99 U.S.App.D.C. 348, 350, 240 F. 2d 34, 36 (1957). . See Altemus v. Talmadge, 61 App.D.C. 148, 150, 58 F. 2d 874, 876, cert. denied 287 U.S. 614, 53 S.Ct. 16, 77 L.Ed. 533 (1932). See also Smith v. District of Columbia, 89 U.S.App.D.C. 7, 189 F. 2d 671, 39 A.L.R.2d 773 (1951). . Dougherty v. Chas. H. Tompkins Co., supra note 20. . Nielsen v. Barclay Corp., 103 U.S.App. D.C. 136, 255 F. 2d…