14 N.W. 60 (Minn. 1882), Collins v. St. Paul & Sioux City Railroad Company
|Citation:||14 N.W. 60, 30 Minn. 31|
|Opinion Judge:||Gilfillan, C. J.|
|Party Name:||Mary Collins, Administratrix, etc., v. St. Paul & Sioux City Railroad Company|
|Attorney:||Geo. W. Wilson and Emory Clark, for appellant. E. C. Palmer and Daniel Rohrer, for respondent|
|Case Date:||November 24, 1882|
|Court:||Supreme Court of Minnesota|
Action in the district court for Nobles county, to recover damages for personal injuries to plaintiff's intestate. On the trial, before Severance, J., and a jury, when plaintiff rested, the action was dismissed on defendant's motion. Plaintiff appeals from an order refusing a new trial. The case is stated in the opinion.
The failure to have a light upon the engine was a failure of the company to provide proper appliances in operating the train. In this duty the servant represents the master. Drymala v. Thompson, 26 Minn. 40; Wood v. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. Co., 70 N.Y. 195; Flike v. Boston & A. R. Co., 53 N.Y. 549; Ford v. Fitchburg R. Co., 110 Mass. 240; Baltimore, etc., R. Co. v. State, 33 Md. 542.
The servants of defendant engaged in operating the train were not fellow-servants of plaintiff's intestate. Toledo, W. & W. Ry. Co. v. O'Connor, 77 Ill. 391; Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Gregory, 58 Ill. 272; Toledo, W. & W. Ry. Co. v. Moore, 77 Ill. 217.
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP