TRACY REED, ON HER OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF HER CHILDREN, LEXUS REED AND ARIEL REED Vs. NORFOLK-SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY AND CELANESE LTD.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
TRACY REED, ET AL * NO. 2002-C-0427 VERSUS * COURT OF APPEAL NORFOLK-SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, ET AL. * FOURTH CIRCUIT * STATE OF LOUISIANA * C/W KEVIN C. K. IMBROUGH C/W * * * * * * * * NO. 2002-C-0428 VERSUS NORFOLK-SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, ET AL. C/W C/W LINDA LECOQ NO. 2002-C-0429 VERSUS NORFOLK-SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, ET AL. C/W C/W SARAH E. O’CONNOR NO. 2002-C-0430 VERSUS NORFOLK-SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, ET AL. MURRAY, J., CONCURS WITH REASONS I concur in the result because I find no material distinction between this case and Anderson v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company, et al., which this court recently decided and which is relied upon by the majority herein. However, I note that in both Anderson and the instant case, I believe the court is imposing an additional and unduly harsh burden upon the plaintiff by requiring that his counsel make a second inquiry to the clerk of court (before the expiration of the ninety-day time period) as to why counsel’s initial, timely request for service has not yet been acted upon by the clerk of court.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
