Gray v. Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Co.

Eleventh Circuit

Gray v. Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Co.

155 F.3d 1343, 1998 WL 657666

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedSeptember 25, 1998

DocketNo. 95-8459

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 155 F.3d 1343 (Gray v. Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gray v. Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Co., 155 F.3d 1343, 1998 WL 657666 (11th Cir. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This case is before the court on remand from the United States Supreme Court for further consideration of our earlier opinion in light of Dooley v. Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd., — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1890, 141 L.Ed.2d 102 (1998). In accord with the Court’s opinion, we reverse our previous holding that appellees may recover damages for pain and suffering on their survival action claims based on general maritime law in conjunction with the Death on the High Seas Act, 46 U.S.C.App. §§ 761-768. See Gray v. Lockheed Aeronautical Sys. Co., 125 F.3d 1371, 1381-86 (11th Cir.1997). We affirm the remainder of our decision that does not touch such survival action claims, and remand to the district court for further proceedings consistent with our decision and Dooley.

REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

This case is before the court on remand from the United States Supreme Court for further consideration of our earlier opinion in light of Dooley v. Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd., — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 1890, 141 L.Ed.2d 102 (1998). In accord with the Court’s opinion, we reverse our previous holding that appellees may recover damages for pain and suffering on their survival action claims based on general maritime law in conjunction with the Death on the High Seas Act, 46 U.S.C.App. §§ 761-768. See Gray v. Lockheed Aeronautical Sys. Co., 125 F.3d 1371, 1381-86 (11th Cir.1997). We affirm the remainder of our decision that does not touch such survival action claims, and remand to the district court for further proceedings consistent with our decision and Dooley.

REVERSED IN PART and REMANDED.

Stacy C. Gray, Individually and as Surviving Spouse of Lt. Douglas G. Gray, and as Personal Representative of Lt. Douglas G. Gray, Deceased v. Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Company, a Division of Lockheed Corporation, Cross-Appellee. Grace M. Schumacher, Individually and as Surviving Parent of Lt. John T. Hartman, and as Personal Representative of Lt. John Hartman, Deceased v. Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Company, a Division of Lockheed Corporation, Cross-Appellee. Wilma J. Jennings, Individually, and as Surviving Parent of Lt. David S. Jennings, and as Personal Representative of Lt. David S. Jennings, Deceased v. Lockheed Aeronautical Systems Company, a Division of Lockheed Corporation, Cross-Appellee

155 F.3d 1343 (Eleventh Circuit, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 F.3d 1343, 1998 WL 657666, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gray-v-lockheed-aeronautical-systems-co-ca11-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack