Lila De Groff and George Roerig v. Charles Hunsicker (George Roerig)

238 F.2d 617, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 4072
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit
DecidedNovember 23, 1956
Docket11967_1
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 238 F.2d 617 (Lila De Groff and George Roerig v. Charles Hunsicker (George Roerig)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lila De Groff and George Roerig v. Charles Hunsicker (George Roerig), 238 F.2d 617, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 4072 (3d Cir. 1956).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a decision of the district court dismissing the claim of plaintiffs in an action for injuries sustained in Virginia. The sole question involved is whether the action is barred by the statute of limitations in Virginia. If it is then, under the borrowing statute in Pennsylvania, it is barred here, Pa. Stat.Ann. tit. 12, § 39, Purdon 1953. If barred in the state court it is also barred in federal court in a case depending upon diversity for federal jurisdiction as this one does. Guaranty Trust Co. v. York, 1945, 326 U.S. 99, 65 S.Ct. 1464, 89 L.Ed. 2079.

Interpretation of the Virginia legislation upon this subject is not too easy a task but has been well done by Judge Van Dusen who heard the case in the district court. D.C.E.D.Pa.1956, 141 F. Supp. 592. We have nothing to add to his analysis of the Virginia decisions and statutes.

The judgment of the district court will be affirmed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
238 F.2d 617, 1956 U.S. App. LEXIS 4072, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lila-de-groff-and-george-roerig-v-charles-hunsicker-george-roerig-ca3-1956.