U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 1965

Sylvester v. Messler

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Decided September 10, 1965

351 F.2d 472; 9 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 3 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Eric E. Zisman, Detroit, Mich., for appellants., John A. Ashton, Detroit, Mich., Eg-genberger, Eggenberger & Ashton, Detroit, Mich., on brief, for appellee.

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision. The 7 that cite it most often are listed here.

Michael Lindsey v. Dayton-Hudson Corporation, D/B/A Target Stores, a Minnesota Corporation (10th Cir. 1979)
Walker v. Armco Steel Corp. (Supreme Court of the United States 1980)
Andrews v. Allstate Insurance (District Court, E.D. Michigan 1979)
Walker v. Armco Steel Corp. (United States District Court, Oklahoma Western 1978)
Benn v. Linden Crane Company (District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania 1973)
Vincent Graziano v. George W. Pennell (2d Cir. 1967)
Hendriksen v. Roosevelt Hospital (District Court, S.D. New York 1967)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

These are appeals from dismissal of plaintiffs-appellants’ complaints in diversity actions resulting from an automobile accident. The United States District Judge dismissed these suits on motion because of plaintiffs’ failure to comply with the time and service requirements of the Michigan Statute of Limitations, Mich.Stat.Ann., 1962 Rev., §§ 27A.5805 and 27A.5856.

The District Judge held that Ragan v. Merchants Transfer & Warehouse Co., 337 U.S. 530, 69 S.Ct. 1233, 93 L.Ed. 1520 (1949), mandated application of the state limitation provisions cited above. We agree with Judge Kaess’ brief but well-reasoned opinion, Sylvester et al. v. Messier, 246 F.Supp. 1 (E.D.Mich. 1964).

At oral argument and by supplemental briefs, appellants suggested to this court, however, that a United States Supreme Court case decided a year after the District Court opinion referred to above had overruled the Ragan case. We have examined the opinion of Chief Justice Warren in Hanna v. Plumer, 380 U.S. 460, 85 S.Ct. 1136, 14 L.Ed.2d 8 (1965), and conclude that although it refers to and cites Ragan, it carefully refrains from overruling same. The instant case appears to us to be directly governed by Ragan.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.