Koblitz v. Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company

Full title: Milton S. KOBLITZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BALTIMORE AND OHIO RAILROAD…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: Apr 28, 1959

266 F.2d 320 (2d Cir. 1959)

Opinion

No. 180, Docket 25331.

Argued March 3, 1959.

Decided April 28, 1959.

David M. Palley, New York City (Nathan B. Kogan and Louis Boehm, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellant.

John D. Calhoun, New York City (Cravath, Swaine Moore and John F. Hunt, Jr., New York City, on the brief), for defendant-appellee.

Before MEDINA and HINCKS, Circuit Judges, and MATHES, District Judge.^_

_ United States District Judge for the Southern District of California, sitting by designation.

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.