Mellon v. Goodyear, 277 U.S. 335 (1928)

U.S. Supreme Court, (May 28, 1928)

Docket number: 131
Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/20026126
Id. vLex: VLEX-20026126

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Search in this document

Document options

Cited by:

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Cir. - Knox Williams, Administrator Ad Litem of the Estate of W. G. Snyder, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, Defendant-Appellee., 371 F.2d 125 (6th Cir. 1967)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Cir. - Gail M. Connors, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Mary N. Gallick, Executrix of the Estate of James J. Gallick, Deceased, and Mary N. Gallick, Defendants-Appellees., 339 F.2d 381 (6th Cir. 1964)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Zane Milton Walrod, Jr., Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Southern Pacific Company, a Corporation, Defendant-Appellee., 447 F.2d 930 (9th Cir. 1971)

U.S. Supreme Court - Sea-Land Services, Inc. v. Gaudet, 414 U.S. 573 (1974)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - Helen Stein Gaudet, Administratrix of the Estate of Awtrey C. Gaudet, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Sea-Land Services, Inc., Defendant-Appellee., 463 F.2d 1331 (5th Cir. 1972)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Cir. - Aaron Schwarder; Donna Eubanks; Kathleen Schwarder, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. United States of America, Defendant-Appellant., 974 F.2d 1118 (9th Cir. 1992)

See all citations to this document

Text:

U.S. Supreme Court MELLON v. GOODYEAR, 277 U.S. 335 (1928)

[Page 277 U.S. 335, 346]

is emphasized by repeated holdings that dependents can recover only pecuniary damages. American Railroad Co. of Porto Rico v. Didricksen, 227 U.S. 145, 149, 33 S. Ct. 224; Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. McGinnis, , 33 S. Ct. 426; C. & O. Ry. Co. v. Kelly, Adm's, 241 U.S. 485, 36 S. Ct. 630; C. & O. Ry. Co. v. Gainey, Adm'r, 241 U.S. 494, 36 S. Ct. 633; Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Mosler (Nov. 21, 1927) 275 U.S. 133, 48 S. Ct. 49. Neither statute defines the nature of the damages to be recovered; this was left for interpretation. We followed the construction given the earlier one when it became necessary to interpret and apply the later and similar act.

The judgment of the court below must be reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Reversed.

Other documents:

United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert W. Curley, Defendant-Appellant., 55... | case of tribunal superior de justicia - sevilla, andalucía - sala de lo contencioso-administrativo, of april 22, 1998 | Cedula do 25 de novembro de 2003 da Delegacion Territorial de Vigo de notificacion da re... | El penúltimo centro | USA vs Lewis 5th Cir 2007 | resolucion de 11 de febrero de 2002, de loterías y apuestas del estado, por la que se hace público la combinación ganadora, el número... | Case of Tribunal Superior de Justicia Logrono La Rioja Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo n 182 of March 23 2006 | case of tribunal superior de justicia - galicia - sala de lo social nº 507/2008, of april 28, 2008 | Case of Tribunal Supremo - Sala Primera, de lo Civil nº 780/2000, of July 19, 2000

Mellon v. Goodyear, 277 U.S. 335 (1928)

Search in this document

Document options

Sponsored Ads:

Cited by:

Text:

Case Law