Ragan v. Merchants Transfer & Warehouse Co. | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Argued April 20, 1949 Decided June 20, 1949 | |
Full case name | Ragan v. Merchants Transfer & Warehouse Co. |
Citations | 337
U.S.
530 (
more) 69 S. Ct. 1233; 93
L. Ed. 1520; 1949
U.S. LEXIS 2147 |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Douglas, joined by Vinson, Black, Reed, Frankfurter, Murphy, Jackson, Burton |
Dissent | Rutledge |
Ragan v. Merchants Transfer & Warehouse Co., 337 U.S. 530 (1949), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that federal courts sitting in diversity should begin the running of the statute of limitations for a claim according to state law instead of according to the federal rules of civil procedure. The court reasoned that a claim could not be given longer life in federal court than it would have had in a state court while being consistent with the holding in Erie Railroad v. Tompkins. [1]
Ragan v. Merchants Transfer & Warehouse Co. | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Argued April 20, 1949 Decided June 20, 1949 | |
Full case name | Ragan v. Merchants Transfer & Warehouse Co. |
Citations | 337
U.S.
530 (
more) 69 S. Ct. 1233; 93
L. Ed. 1520; 1949
U.S. LEXIS 2147 |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Douglas, joined by Vinson, Black, Reed, Frankfurter, Murphy, Jackson, Burton |
Dissent | Rutledge |
Ragan v. Merchants Transfer & Warehouse Co., 337 U.S. 530 (1949), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that federal courts sitting in diversity should begin the running of the statute of limitations for a claim according to state law instead of according to the federal rules of civil procedure. The court reasoned that a claim could not be given longer life in federal court than it would have had in a state court while being consistent with the holding in Erie Railroad v. Tompkins. [1]