97 N.W. 824 (Neb. 1903), 13,226, Omaha Street Railway Company v. Larson

Docket Nº:13,226
Citation:97 N.W. 824, 70 Neb. 591
Opinion Judge:OLDHAM, C.
Party Name:OMAHA STREET RAILWAY COMPANY v. NELS LARSON
Attorney:John L. Webster, for plaintiff in error. Frank H. Gaines, James E. Kelby and John A. Storey, contra.
Judge Panel:OLDHAM, C. HASTINGS and AMES, CC., concur. HASTINGS and AMES, CC. , concur.
Case Date:December 16, 1903
Court:Supreme Court of Nebraska
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 824

97 N.W. 824 (Neb. 1903)

70 Neb. 591

OMAHA STREET RAILWAY COMPANY

v.

NELS LARSON

No. 13,226

Supreme Court of Nebraska

December 16, 1903

ERROR to the district court for Douglas county: PAUL JESSEN, JUDGE. Affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

John L. Webster, for plaintiff in error.

Frank H. Gaines, James E. Kelby and John A. Storey, contra.

OLDHAM, C. HASTINGS and AMES, CC., concur.

OPINION

[70 Neb. 592] OLDHAM, C.

This is an action to recover damages alleged to have been sustained by reason of the negligence of the Omaha Street Railway Company. The allegations of the petition that are material to an understanding of this controversy are:

"On September 16, 1899, plaintiff with his horse and wagon was driving northward on Military avenue in Omaha and, when about half way between Parker and Decatur streets in said city on the east side of Military avenue, desiring to cross to the west side of said Military avenue, turned his horse to do so, but, as the horse stepped between the two east rails of defendant's tracks on said street, a motor car belonging to defendant, propelled by electricity and running at a dangerously and negligently high rate of speed, and without any warning to plaintiff, negligently ran into and struck plaintiff's horse, which was hitched to the wagon in which plaintiff was riding, and said horse became entangled in the fender on the front end of defendant's said motor car.

"Plaintiff says that when defendant's motor car struck [70 Neb. 593] his horse, as aforesaid, the motorman in charge of said car, both seeing and knowing the imminent danger in which plaintiff was placed by the negligence of said defendant, and having the power to stop said car, in absolute disregard of defendant's duty to stop said car and avoid injury to plaintiff, negligently failed even to diminish the speed of said car, but on the contrary said motorman continued to run said car at great speed for about the total distance of a block, pushing, dragging and carrying plaintiff's horse and wagon for the entire distance.

"Plaintiff says that, after defendant's motor car struck his horse as aforesaid, defendant's motorman who was in charge of said car, and who could have stopped said car, and whose duty it was to stop said car, negligently continued to run it at great speed, whereby plaintiff was greatly and seriously injured, without the fault of plaintiff, for, after defendant's motor had, as aforesaid, pushed, dragged and carried plaintiff's said horse and wagon for about 120

Page 825

feet, plaintiff was forcibly and violently thrown from his wagon, and hurled to the pavement, and was seriously and severely cut, injured and bruised about his head, back, spine and legs, his right leg being so badly broken that it was necessary, in order to save plaintiff's life, to amputate his leg, which was accordingly done, whereby the plaintiff was made to suffer great pain, and physical and...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP