Homberger v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

Sixth Circuit

Homberger v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

148 F.2d 999, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2540

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedMay 14, 1945

DocketNo. 9916

StatusPublished

This text of 148 F.2d 999 (Homberger v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Homberger v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, 148 F.2d 999, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2540 (6th Cir. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case came on to be heard upon the record, briefs and oral argument of counsel. And it appearing that the District Court did not err in holding that the appellant’s decedent was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law, precluding recovery (Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. Depew, 40 Ohio St. 121): It is ordered that the judgment of the District Court be, and it hereby is, affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This case came on to be heard upon the record, briefs and oral argument of counsel. And it appearing that the District Court did not err in holding that the appellant’s decedent was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law, precluding recovery (Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. Depew, 40 Ohio St. 121): It is ordered that the judgment of the District Court be, and it hereby is, affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 F.2d 999, 1945 U.S. App. LEXIS 2540, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/homberger-v-baltimore-ohio-railroad-ca6-1945.