Koblitz v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

Second Circuit

Koblitz v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

266 F.2d 320, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 3963

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided April 28, 1959·No. No. 180, Docket 25331·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm on the opinion of Judge Bryan, reported at 164 F.Supp. 367. In addition to the estoppel of the former judgment we find that the basic point now argued as to whether the source of appellant’s claim is derivative or direct, was determined in the appeal to this Court from the adverse judgment in the prior action. Rieser v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 2 Cir., 1955, 228 F.2d 563. Thus appellant is bound not only by a direct but also by a collateral estoppel.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm on the opinion of Judge Bryan, reported at 164 F.Supp. 367. In addition to the estoppel of the former judgment we find that the basic point now argued as to whether the source of appellant’s claim is derivative or direct, was determined in the appeal to this Court from the adverse judgment in the prior action. Rieser v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 2 Cir., 1955, 228 F.2d 563. Thus appellant is bound not only by a direct but also by a collateral estoppel.

Affirmed.

Koblitz v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, 266 F.2d 320, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 3963 (2d Cir. 1959).

Pincite

266 F.2d 320 (Koblitz v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related