Page images
PDF
EPUB

CARRIERS OF LIVE STOCK CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS
-Continued.

-Continued.
horse in transitu.

Application of Arkansas statute
Galliers v. Chicago, B. & Q. prescribing method of making
R. Co. (Iowa), 28.

up passenger train.
Striking out allegation as to Prescott & N. W. Ry, Co. v.

cost of horse, in action for Smith (Ark.), 809.
its loss.

Burden of proof where defend-
Galliers v. Chicago, B. & Q. ant company admitted that
R. Co. (Iowa), 28.

plaintiff was entitled to actual
Sufficiency of evidence in ac- damages.

tion for injury to live stock Louisville & N. R. Co. v.
in transitu.

Champion (Ky.), 732.
Susong v. Florida Cent. & Care required in keeping car
P. R. Co. (Ga.), 48.

steps and platform free from
Sufficiency of evidence to show ice and snow.

that plaintiff was not obliged Herbert v. St. Paul City Ry.
to receive cattle reaching Co. (Minn.), 152.
their destination at midnight Carrier under no duty to passen-
and put in an insecure pen, ger to keep in safe condition
although plaintiff did not depot platform used exclu-
have money with him for sively for freight.
freight charges.

Houston, E. & W. T. Ry, Co.
Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. v. v. Grubbs (Tex.), 754.

Trammell (Tex.), 685. Company cannot be compelled
CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS

to operate road at actual loss.
See Common Carriers.

Jack v. Williams (S. Car.), 10.
Damages.

Contributory Negligence.
Personal Injuries.

Alighting at other places than
Tickets and Fares.

station, insufficiency of evi-
Trespassers.

dence.
Absence of statutory number of St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. o.
brakemen, question for jury.

Farr (Ark ), 762.
Comerford v. New York, etc., Alighting from moving car.
R. Co. (Mass ), 130.

Brown 7. New York, N. H.
Absolute duty of company to

& H. R. Co. (Mass.), 143.
protect prospective passenger Pence v. Wabash R. Co.
from insults of station agent.

(lowa). 77.
St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co.

Alighting from moving car in
Wilson (Ark.), 793.

obedience to direction of
Admissibility of evidence of employee.
change in method of operating Pence v.

Wabash R. Co.
trains, harmless error.

(Iowa), 77.
Prescott & N. W. Ry. Co. v. Alighting from moving car,
Smith (Ark.), 809.

question for jury.
Admissibility of evidence that Comerford New York,
father gave son car fare, in

etc., R. Co. (Mass.), 130.
action for injury sustained by Alighting from moving train.
latter while crossing track to Lindsay v. Southern Ry. Co.
board car.

(Ga.), 748.
Chicago & E.I.R. Co. v. Hus. Boarding moving train.
ton (I11.), 141.

Pencev. Wabash R. Co.
Allegations as to cause of acci-

(Iowa), 77.
dent to passenger rendered Boarding moving train in obe-
immaterial by admission of dience to direction of em-
the establishment of prima ployee.
facie case.

Pence v. Wabash R. Co.
McNeill v. Durham & C. R.

(Iowa), 77.
Co. (N. Car.), 707.

Boy assisting passenger in
Alleged passenger on freight jumping from moving train.
train presumptively a tres-

Oxsher v. Houston, E. & W.
passer.

T. Ry. Co. (Tex.), 727.
Purple v. Union Pac. R. Co. Boy assisting passenger to
(C. C. A.), 711.

board train getting off after

v.

V.

CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS
-Continued.

-Continued.
starting of train.

Sufficiency of evidence to show
Oxsher v. Houston, E. & W. contributory negligence of
T. Ky. Co. (Tex.), 727.

youth 16 years of age riding
Boy 16 years of age not inca- with head extended beyond

pable of sufficient discretion side of moving train.
to avoid extending part of Benedict v. Minneapolis &
person beyond car line.

St. L. R. Co. (Minn.), 701.
Benedict v. Minneapolis & Walking on track to board car.

St. L. R. Co. (Minn.), 701. Spavin v. Lake Shore & M.
Burden of proof of due care on S. Ry. Co. (Mich.), 135.

plaintiff in action for injury Damages.
to passenger caused by Elements of damages for
alighting from moving car. injury to passenger, appre-
Brown v. New York, N. H. & hension of insanity.
H. R. Co. (Mass.), 143.

Walker v. Boston & M. R. R.
Failure to look and listen

(N. H.), 80.
before crossing track to Evidence of mental suffering
board car.

of passengers properly ex-
Chicago & E. I. R. Co. v. cluded where no personal
Huston (111.), 141.

injury was shown.
Leaving car for some purpose Smith v. Wilmington & W.
not incident to journey.

R. Co. (N. Car.), 772.
Chicago, etc., Ry. Co. v. Sat- Excessive verdict.
tler (Neb.), 688.

Herbert v. St. Paul City Ry.
Negro. compelled to ride on

Co. (Minn.), 152.
platform of crowded car of Excessive verdict for injury to
excursion train.

passenger.
Williams v. International &

Pence v. Wabash R. Co.
G. N. R. Co. (Tex.), 778.

(Iowa), 77.
Passenger alighting from Excessive verdict for injury to
moving train at invitation of

passenger, question for jury.
conductor was not guilty of Loker v. Southwestern Mis-
contributory negligence.

souri Electric Ry. Co.
Johnson v. Atlantic & N. C.

(Mo.), 132.
R. Co. (N. Car.), 770.

Extra fare only could be recov-
Passenger not deprived of right ered where passenger ejected

of visiting dining car by his by mistake of conductor to
knowledge of existence of an whom he refused to pay fare.
unvestibuled s eeper in train. Brown v. Rapid Ry. Co.
Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v.

(Mich.), 819.
Adams (C. C. A ), 734.

Mental and physical suffering
Passenger riding on platform as elements of damages for

of caboose to avoid danger. injury to passenger.
Prescott & N. W. Ry, Co. v. Walker v. Boston & M. R. R.
Smith (Ark.), 809.

(N. H.), 80.
Prima facie case of contribu- Punitive damages cannot be

tory negligence not estab- recovered for employees' acts
lished by evidence of misstep unless they are willful, wan-
of passenger while alighting. ton, or malicious, and in the
Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Gard- line of his employment.
ner (C. C. A.), 759.

St. Louis, etc., Ry, Co. v.
Riding with part of person

Wilson (Ark.), 793.
extended beyond car line.

Pupitive damages, error to
Benedict v. Minneapolis & submit question to jury in

St. L. R. Co. (Minn.), 701. action for failure to stop
Riding with part of person train at flag station.

extended beyond car line as Yazoo & M. V. R. Co. v.
affected by fact that cars

Faust (Miss.), 818.
were overcrowded and pas- Punitive damages, instruction
senger was required to ride not warranted by evidence
on platform.

in action for insulting pro-
Benedict v. Minneapolis & spective passenger in wait-

St. L. R. Co. (Minn.), 701. ing room.

CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS
- Continued.

-Continued.
St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v. persons in waiting room.
Wilson (Ark.), 793.

St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v.
Punitive damages, passengers Wilson (Ark.), 793.

leaving train because of con- Effect of knowledge of facts sug-
ductor's mistaken refusal to

gesting inquiry as to whether
accept ticket.

passengers may ride on freight
Louisville & N. R. Co. v.

train.
Champion (Ky.), 732.

Purple v. Union Pac. R. Co.
Right of husband to recovery (C. C. A.), 711.
for mental anguish of wife

Ejection of Passengers.
separated from children.
International & G. N. R. Person riding on freight train
Co. v. Anchonda (Tex.),

without permit, relying on
788.

representations of agent
Sufficiency of evidence of

which he knows to be false.
nature of passenger's inju-

Houston, E. & W.T. Ry. Co.
ries.

v. Stell (Tex.), 722.
Nicholson v. Northern Pac. Presumption that requirement
Ry. Co. (C. C. A.), 751.

of conductor was legal where
Degree of care.

passenger was ejected for
Williams v. International & G. nonpayment of street rail-
N. R. Co. (Tex.), 778.

way fare.
Degree of care required in stop-

Smith v. Indianapolis St.
ping street car.

Ry. Co. (Ind.), 116.
Freeman v. Metropolitan St.

Sufficiency of evidence to show
Ry. Co. (Ms.), 582.

place of ejection.

Gaukler v. Detroit, G. H. &
Degree of care required of street
railroad company.

M. Ry. Co. (Mich.), 806.
Citizens' Ry. Co. v. Craig

Evidence.
(Tex), 516.

Error in admitting evidence
Duty of carrier to keep distant as to wrecks happening on
corner of depot grounds in

trains in charge of engineer
good condition.

whose competency has been
Davis v. Houston, E. & W. T. proven.
Ry, Co. (Tex.), 800.

McNeill v Durham & C. R.

Co. (N. Car.), 707.
Duty of carrier to one entering

Of outcries of other passengers
train with understanding with

in action for injury to pas-
conductor not to pay fare.
Purple v. Union Pac. R. Co.

senger caused by collision.
(C. C. A.), 711.

Louisville & N. R. Co. v.

Simpson (Ky.), 513.
Duty of street railway company Outcries of other injured pas-
to discharge passenger at safe

sengers as res gestæ.
place.

Louisville & N. R. Co. v.
Sweet v. Louisville Ry, Co.

Carothers (Ky.), 750.
(Ky.), 768.

Hack driver properly joined as
Duty to furnish' safe place to defendant in action against
ride.

railway company for injury to
Benedict v. Minneapolis & St. hack passenger.
L. R. Co. (Minn.), 701.

Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry, Co. o.
Duty to heat waiting room.

Durand (Kan.), 519.
St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v. Harmless error in admitting evi-
Wilson (Ark.), 793.

dence as to extent of passen-
Duty to inform passenger that ger's injuries.
stop is not for station.

Loker 0. Southwestern Mis-
St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. V. souri Electric Ry. Co. (Mo.),
Farr (Ark.), 762.

132.
Duty to light depot grounds. Instruction as to liability of
Davis v. Houston, E. & W. T. carrier erroneous because re-
Ry. Co. (Tex.), 800.

quiring coincident freedom
Duty to protect prospective from negligence on the defend-

passenger from insults from ant's part and contributory

CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS
- Continued.

-Continued.
negligence on the part of conductor having apparent
plaintiff's injured wife.

authority.
International & G. N. R. Co. Spence v. Chicago, R. I. & P.
v. Anchonda (Tex.), 788.

Ry. Co. (Iowa), 822.
Instruction as to negligence in Liability for refusal to unlock

failing to heat waiting room station room.
not erroneous as making car- St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v.
rier an insurer.

Wilson (Ark.), 793.
St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v. Liability for willful and wanton
Wilson (Ark.), 793.

and malicious acts of em:
Instruction not warranted by ployees to passenger.

evidence, in action for injury St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. 0.
caused by derailment.

Wilson (Ark.), 793.
McNeill v. Durham & C. R.

Limiting Liability.
Co. (N. Car.), 707.

Contract exempting company
Insufficiency of evidence to show from liability for any injury
negligence in action for injury

to person did not extend to
to prospective passenger caused

passenger's death.
by failure to light depot.

Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v.
Davis v. Houston, etc., Ry. Co.

Adams (C. C. A.), 734.
(Tex.), 800.

Limits of depot premises under
Interest in actions ex delicto

Mississippi Code prohibiting
cannot be recovered.

the backing of trains near
Southern Ry. Co. v. Horner

passenger depots beyond á
(Ga.), 47.

certain speed.
Intoxication, not negligence as King v. Illinois Cent. R. Co.

matter of law to leave ejected (C. C. A.), 875.
intoxicated passenger at cer- Negligence in starting train.
tain point.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Gardner
Gaukler v. Detroit, G. H. & M.

(C. C. A.), 759.
Ry. Co. (Mich.), 806.

Negligence of company in run-
Jurisdiction to order destruction

ning vestibuled train with
of road and sale of materials

some unprotected platforms, at
where its operation would be

unusual speed, question for
at an actual loss.

the jury.
Jack v. Williams (S. Car.), 10.

Northern Pac. Ry. Co.
Liability for assault on passen- Adams (C. C. A.), 734.
ger by conductor.

Nonsuit properly ordered in
Johnson v. Detroit, Y. & A. A. action for carrying passenger
Ry. (Mich.), 827.

beyond destination, where she
Liability for injury to boy

was a woman accompanied by
assisting passengers caused by

her children, and it was rain-
getting off train after it is

ing.
started as affected by fact that

Smith v. Wilmington & W. R.
trainmen had not been notified

Co. (N. Car.), 772.
that he was not a passenger. One entering train with under-
Oxsher v. Houston, E. & W.

standing with conductor not to
T. Ry. Co. (Tex.), 727.

pay fare a trespasser.
Liability for injury to passenger Purple v. Union Pac. R. Co.

compelled to ride on platform (C. C. A.), 711.
of swaying car.

One riding on train prohibited
Williams V. International & from carrying passengers a
G. N. R. Co. (Tex.), 778.

trespasser.
Liability for injury to passenger Purple v. Union Pac. R. Co.

in station of terminal company (C. C. A.), 711.
where carrier had not con- Pain and suffering as elements
tracted for use of separate of damages in action for injury
portion of station.

to passenger.
Frazier v. New York, N. H. & Pence v. Wabash R.

Co.
H. R. Co. (Mass.), 814.

(Iowa), 77.
Liability for injury to person Passengers actually on train
accepted as

passenger by whether it is moving or not is

V.
V.

soon.

CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS
- Continued.

- Continued.
being “transported over road,” statute providing for liability
within meaning of Nebraska in certain cases where passen-
statute.

ger is being “transported over
Chicago, etc., Ry. Co. v. Sat- road."
tler (Neb.), 688.

Chicago, etc., Ry. Co.
Passenger leaviug car for a Sattler (Neb.), 688.
purpose not incident to journey

Sufficiency of evidence to show
is not being “transported over ticket agent's knowledge of
road,” within meaning of Ne-

passenger's relationship in
braska statute.

action for mental anguish of
Chicago, etc., Ry. Co.

mother from separation from
Sattler (Neb.), 688.

her children caused by negli-
Presumption of negligence from

gence in starting train too
injury to passenger.
Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Gardner International & G. N. R. Co. v.
(C. C. A.), 759.

Anchonda (Tex.), 788.
Questiou for jury as to negli-

Tickets and Fares.
gence in overcrowding excur-
sion train.

Excursion ticket construed to
Williams v. International & G. embody contract entitling
N. R. Co. (Tex.), 778.

holder to transportation be-
Question for jury whether street tween certain points.

railway passenger was dis- International & G. N. R. Co.
charged at dangerous place.

v. Ing (Tex.), 746.
Sweet v. Louisville Ry. Co.

Passenger was not obliged to
(Ky.), 768.

prove that defendant exe-

cuted and issued ticket where
Question for jury whether there

no plea of non est factum.
was negligence in overcrowd-

International & G. N. R. Co.
ing excursion train, where
negro was injured by reason of

v. Ing (Tex.), 746.

Ticket not having printed
having to ride on platform of
swaying car.

notice provided for by Texas
Williams v. International & G.

statute not transferable.
N. R. Co. (Tex.), 778.

International & G. N. R. Co.
Question of fitness of place of

v. Ing (Tex.), 746.
ejection of passenger elimi-

Ticket prima facie evidence of
nated where he was injured at

right to carriage between
a point 25 or 30 feet distant.

certain points.
Gaukler v. Detroit, G. H. & M.

International & G. N. R. Co.
Ry. Co. (Mich.), 806.

v. Ing (Tex.), 746.

Tickets transferable.
Right of passenger to leave train

International & G. N. R. Co.
on account of business

v. Iug (Tex.), 746.
curiosity.

Utmost human skill, diligence
Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v.

and foresight not required in
Sattler (Neb.), 688.
Sufficiency of evidence of negli-

stopping street railway car.

Freeman v. Metropolitan St.
gence where passenger slipped
on ice and snow on car steps

Ry. Co. (Mo.), 584.
and platform.

CARS.
Herbert v. St. Paul City Ry.
Co. (Minn.), 152.

See Carriers of Freight.
Sufficiency of evidence to show

Master and Servant.
invitation from agent to cross
depot grounds to purchase CAR STEPS.
ticket.

See Carriers of Passengers.
Davis v. Houston, E. & W. T.
Ry. Co. (Tex.), 800,

CATTLE CHUTE.
Sufficiency of evidence to show
that passenger left a car for

See Master and Servant,
some purpose not incident to
his journey so as to be unable CATTLE GUARDS.
to claim protection of Nebraska See Stock, Injuries to.

or

« PreviousContinue »