Rostron v. Marriott Hotels

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• Pennsylvania borrowing statute made California limitations law applicable, and action was thus untimely, although it would have been timely if Pennsylvania limitations period had been applied

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Gwaltney v. Stone
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1989-09-13· cited 23×
• Hayes v. Roberts & Schaefer Co.
  West Virginia Supreme Court· 1994-12-08· cited 7×
• Willey v. Bracken
  West Virginia Supreme Court· 2010-10-14· cited 2×
• Yoder v. Frontier Nursing Univ., Inc.
  W.D. Pennsylvania· 2018-10-30· cited 1×

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Mack Trucks, Inc. v. Bendix-Westinghouse Automotive Air Brake Company v. Latrobe Die Castingcompany, Third-Party
  Third Circuit· 1967-01-18· cited 110×
• Martinez v. Traubner
  California Supreme Court· 1982-11-29· cited 27×
• Grimmer v. Harbor Towers
  California Court of Appeal· 1982-06-25· cited 7×
• Hafer v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 1981-10-06· cited 2×