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
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 60

14 N.W. 60 (Minn. 1882)

30 Minn. 31

Mary Collins, Administratrix, etc.,

v.

St. Paul & Sioux City Railroad Company

Supreme Court of Minnesota

November 24, 1882

          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.

          Order affirmed.

         Geo. W. Wilson and Emory Clark, for appellant.

         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.

         E. C. Palmer and Daniel Rohrer, for respondent, that plaintiff's intestate and those engaged in operating the train were fellow-servants, cited Gormley v. Ohio & M. Ry. Co., 72 Ind. 31; Foster v. Minn. Cent. Ry. Co., 14 Minn. 277, (360;) Gates v. Southern Minn. Ry. Co., 28 Minn. 110; Coon v. Syracuse R. Co., 5 N.Y. 492; Chicago & N.W. R. Co. v. Scheuring, 4 App. Cas. (Ill.) 533; Holden v. Fitchburg R. Co., 129 Mass. 268; Curran v. Merchants' Mfg. Co., 130 Mass. 374; Alabama & F. R. Co. v. Waller, 48 Ala. 459; Colorado C. R. Co. v. Ogden, 3 Col. 499; Shields v. Yonge, 15 Ga. 349; Beaulieu v. Portland Co., 48 Me. 291; Hanrathy v. N. C. Ry. Co., 46 Md. 280; Michigan C. R. Co. v. Smithson, 45 Mich. 212; Memphis & C. R. Co. v. Thomas, 51 Miss. 637; Marshall v. Schricker, 63 Mo. 308; McAndrews v. Burns, 39 N. J. Law, 117; Sammon v. N. Y. & H. R. Co., 62 N.Y. 251; Lehigh Coal Co. v. Jones, 86 Pa. St. 432; Robinson v. H. & T. Cent. Ry. Co., 46 Tex. 540; Hard v. Vt. & C. R. Co., 32 Vt. 473; Columbus, etc., Ry. Co. v. Troesch, 57 Ill. 155; S. C., 68 Ill. 545; Mercer v. Jackson, 54 Ill. 397; Collier v. Steinhart, 51 Cal. 116; Slattery v. Toledo & W. Ry. Co., 23 Ind. 81; Jones v. Mills, 126 Mass. 84...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP