SAMUELS ET AL.
v.
MACKELL, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF QUEENS COUNTY, ET AL.; AND FERNANDEZ V. MACKELL, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF QUEENS COUNTY, ET AL.
SAMUELS ET AL.
MACKELL, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF QUEENS COUNTY, ET AL.; AND FERNANDEZ V. MACKELL, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF QUEENS COUNTY, ET AL.
393 U.S. 1047
Supreme Court of the United States (1969)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Crane v. Cedar Rapids & Iowa City Ry. Co., 395 U.S. 164 (U.S. 1969)…part of a person injured . . . which contributed in any way or in any degree directly to the injury.” The jury returned a verdict for respondent railroad. The Supreme Court of Iowa affirmed, - Iowa -, 160 N. W. 2d 838 (1968). We granted certiorari. 393 U. S. 1047 (1969). We affirm. The Safety Appliance Act did not create a federal cause of action for either employees or nonemployees seeking damages for injuries resulting from a railroad’s violation of the Act. Moore v. C. & O. R. Co., 291 U. S. 205 (1934).…