The American and English Railroad Cases: A Collection of All Cases in the Courts of Last Resort in America and England [1879?-1895].
Lawrence Lewis, Adelbert Hamilton, John Houston Merrill, William Mark McKinney, James Manford Kerr, John Crawford Thomson
Edward Thompson Company, 1882 - Railroad law
Covers cases decided [1879?]-1895.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
accident action agents alleged answer appear appellant approaching attempting authority avoid bell bound carried carrier cars cattle cause charge Chicago circumstances claim common complaint conductor considered construction contract contributory negligence course court crossing damages danger deceased defendant defendant's delivered direction distance duty employees engine entitled error evidence exercise facts feet further give given going ground guilty held highway horse injury instruction judgment jury land liable look Mass matter means motion necessary negligence notice objection opinion ordinary party passed passenger person plaintiff platform present proper prove question R. R. Co railroad company railway reached reason received recover refused result road rule side speed station statute stop street sufficient sustained switch taken testimony ticket tion track train transportation travelling trial verdict wagon whistle witnesses
Page 292 - All that is perfectly correct: for, although the ass may have been wrongfully there, still the defendant was bound to go along the road at such a pace as would be likely to prevent mischief. Were this not so, a man might justify the driving over goods left on a public highway, or even over a man lying asleep there, or the purposely running against a carriage going on the wrong side of the road.
Page 316 - The cause was tried to a jury, and resulted in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $452.44.
Page 482 - ... or the transgression of a positive law of this country, there the Court says he has no right to be assisted. It is upon that ground the Court goes; not for the sake of the defendant, but because they will not lend their aid to such a plaintiff. So if the plaintiff and defendant were to change sides, and the defendant was to bring his action against the plaintiff, the latter would then have the advantage of it; for where both are equally in fault, potior est conditio dcfendentis.
Page 481 - The objection that a contract is immoral or illegal as between plaintiff and defendant sounds at all times very ill in the mouth of the defendant. It is not for his sake, however, that the objection is ever allowed : but it is founded in general principles of policy, which the defendant has the advantage of, contrary to the real justice, as between him and the plaintiff, by accident, if I may so say. The principle of public policy is this : Ex dolo malo non oritur actio.
Page 468 - ... 1 of the Constitution of the United States, which provides that no State shall pass any law impairing the obligation of a contract, and also violated that clause of the fourteenth amendment of that instrument, which provides that no State shall deprive any person of property without due process of law.
Page 560 - The Company shall not be entitled to any Mines of Coal, Ironstone, Slate, or other Minerals under any Land purchased by them, except only such Parts thereof as shall be necessary to be dug or carried away or used in the Construction of the Works...
Page 488 - By reason of the negligence of any person in the service of the employer who has the charge or control of any signal, points, locomotive engine, or train upon a railway...
Page 597 - Every railroad company shall have the right with its road to intersect, connect with, or cross, any other railroad; and shall receive and transport each the other's passengers, tonnage, and cars, loaded or empty, without delay or discrimination.