The American and English Railroad Cases: A Collection of All Cases, Affecting Railroads of Every Kind, Decided by the Courts of Appellate Jurisdiction in the United States, England, and Canada [1894-1913].E. Thompson Company, 1909 |
Common terms and phrases
accident Adm'r affirmed agent alight alleged appellant appellant's appellee applied authorities brakeman carrier charge Chicago Circuit Court collision common carrier complaint conductor Consolidated Ry construction contract contributory negligence corporation counsel County crossing damages danger deceased defendant in error defendant's demurrer duty eminent domain employees engine entitled evidence exercise fact feet fellow servant fendant foot-notes appended gence held Indianapolis Union Railway injury instruction intestate Iowa jury land liability locomotive Louisville & N. R. Lumber Marshallville miles Minn motion motorman N. R. Co negligence per se operating ordinary pany party passenger person plaintiff in error platform question rail railroad company railroad track Railway Company reason recover refused risk road rule running Southern station statute stop street car street railway Supreme Court sustained switch testified testimony Texarkana thereof ticket tion Traction turntable verdict witness
Popular passages
Page 428 - Municipal and other corporations and individuals invested with the privilege of taking private property for public use shall make just compensation for property taken, injured or destroyed by the construction or enlargement of their works, highways or improvements, which compensation shall be paid or secured before such taking, injury or destruction.
Page 221 - Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.
Page 528 - Neither party to an obligation can be compelled specifically to perform it, unless the other party thereto has performed, or is compellable specifically to perform, everything to which the former is entitled under the same obligation, either completely or nearly so, together with full compensation for any want of entire performance.
Page 163 - W. 546): that the contributory negligence of the party Injured will not defeat the action if it be shown that the defendant might, by the exercise of reasonable care and prudence, have avoided the consequences of the Injured party's negligence.
Page 86 - By reason of the act or omission of any person in the service of the employer...
Page 379 - The true rule is, that what is the proximate cause of an injury is ordinarily a question for the jury. It is not a question of science or of legal knowledge. It is to be determined as a fact, in view of the circumstances of fact attending it.
Page 381 - Although the defendant's negligence may have been the primary cause of the injury complained of, yet an action for such injury cannot be maintained if the proximate and immediate cause of the injury can be traced to the want of ordinary care and caution in the person injured, subject to this qualification, which has grown up in recent years (having been first enunciated in Davies v.
Page 306 - Is certainly no showing on which we can say as a matter of law that she was guilty of contributory negligence. The...
Page 148 - The law has so high a regard for human life that it will not impute negligence to an effort to preserve it, unless made under such circumstances as to constitute rashness in the judgment of prudent persons.
Page 450 - Act, such common carrier may set off therein any sum it has contributed or paid to any insurance, relief benefit, or indemnity that may have been paid to the injured employee or the person entitled thereto on account of the injury or death for which said action was brought.