Wiley L. Bolden v. City of Mobile, Alabama, 626 F.2d 1324 (5th Cir. 1980). · Go Syfert
Search
Wiley L. Bolden v. City of Mobile, Alabama, 626 F.2d 1324 (5th Cir. 1980). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
14 citation events across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Laubie v. Sonesta International Hotel Corporation (ca5, 1985-02-07)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Laubie v. Sonesta International Hotel Corporation
5th Cir. · 1985 · confidence medium
If indeed this is so, but see Note, Innkeepers--Limitation of Liability for Loss of Guests' Property, 22 Tul.L.Rev. 333 (1947), was the statutory intent of the 1912 amendment of Article 2971, in the light of the statutory scheme of Articles 2965-2971 with regard to an innkeeper's liability, also to limit the liability of the innkeeper's employees for loss occasioned through their own "fraud or negligence," Article 2969? 626 F.2d at 1326. 4 Laubie v. Sonesta International Hotel Corp., 650 F.2d 680, 681 (5th Cir.1981) 5 As amended, La.Civ.Code Ann. art. 2971 (West 1984) now provides in pertinent…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Wiley L. Bolden
v.
City of Mobile, Alabama
77-2042.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Sep 15, 1980.
626 F.2d 1324
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

626 F.2d 1324

Wiley L. BOLDEN et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
CITY OF MOBILE, ALABAMA, et al., Defendants-Appellants.

Nos. 76-4210, 77-2042.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 15, 1980.

Charles B. Arendall, Jr., Mobile, Ala., Charles S. Rhyne, Washington, D. C., William S. Rhyne, Washington, D. C., for defendants-appellants.

J. U. Blacksher, Larry Menefee, Mobile, Ala., Edward Still, Birmingham, Ala., Jack Greenberg, Eric Schnapper, New York City, for plaintiffs-appellees.

Dennis J. Dimsey, Atty., Civil Rights Div., Appellate Sect., U. S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., Miriam R. Eisenstein, Brian K. Landsberg, Walter W. Barnett, Attys., Drew S. Days, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., Appellate Section, Civil Rights Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., amicus curiae for United States.

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before WISDOM, SIMPSON and TJOFLAT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

The judgment heretofore entered by the District Court in this case is VACATED and the case is REMANDED to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama for further proceedings in light of the Supreme Court's opinion in City of Mobile, Ala. v. Bolden, ---- U.S. ----, 100 S.Ct. 1490, 64 L.Ed.2d 47 (1980).