Pullum v. Cincinnati, Inc.

Supreme Court

Pullum v. Cincinnati, Inc.

475 U.S. 1114, 106 S. Ct. 1626

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedApril 21, 1986

DocketNo. 85-1392

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 475 U.S. 1114 (Pullum v. Cincinnati, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pullum v. Cincinnati, Inc., 475 U.S. 1114, 106 S. Ct. 1626 (1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from Sup. Ct. Fla. dismissed for want of substantial federal question.

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

Philip H. Eddings, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Scott Philip Eddings, Deceased, on Behalf of Philip H. Eddings, and Virginia Rae Randt, Individually v. Volkswagenwerk, A.G., A/K/A Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft, a Foreign Corporation, Patricia Ann Griffin, by and Through Her Next Friend and Natural Father, Larry D. Griffin, and Larry D. Griffin, Individually v. Ford Motor Company, Albert v. Verhine, Jr., a Minor, by A. Brennis Verhine, His Legal Guardian and A. Brennis Verhine, and Glenda L. Verhine, His Natural Parents, Individually v. Volkswagenwerk, A.G., a Foreign Corporation and Volkswagen of America, Inc., a Foreign Corporation, Dana C. Lamb, a Minor, by and Through His Mother and Next Friend, Jeanne F. Donaldson, Jeanne F. Donaldson, Individually v. Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft, a German Corporation, Volkswagen of America, Inc., a New Jersey Corporation

835 F.2d 1369 (Eleventh Circuit, 1988)

Eddings ex rel. Eddings v. Volkswagenwerk, A.G.

835 F.2d 1369 (Eleventh Circuit, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

475 U.S. 1114, 106 S. Ct. 1626, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pullum-v-cincinnati-inc-scotus-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack