Olney v. Omaha And Council Bluffs Street Ry. Company
Decision Date | 18 April 1907 |
Docket Number | 14,757 |
Citation | 111 N.W. 784,78 Neb. 767 |
Parties | DANA B. OLNEY, APPELLANT, v. OMAHA AND COUNCIL BLUFFS STREET RAILWAY COMPANY, APPELLEE |
Court | Nebraska Supreme Court |
APPEAL from the district court for Douglas county: WILLIAM A REDICK, JUDGE. Affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
P. A Wells, for appellant.
John L Webster and W. J. Connell, contra.
DUFFIE, C. ALBERT and JACKSON, CC., concur.
On or about May 29, 1903, a horse and buggy, belonging to the appellant, was being driven north on Twenty-Fourth street in South Omaha, on the west side of the double tracks of the Omaha & Council Bluffs Street Railway Company, appellee. At a point between H and I streets there was a pile of lumber and a carpenter's bench, at which one Ruffner was at work on or near the sidewalk. The horse reached this point at or near the time a street car coming from the north on the west track was about to pass. The horse reared on his hind legs, and came down with his front feet in front of the car, and was so injured--one of its legs being broken--that he was shortly thereafter shot by a policeman on the street. The buggy and harness were also injured, and this action is brought against the appellee to recover the value of the horse and the damage suffered by the buggy and harness. In his petition the plaintiff alleges that the street railway company was negligent in the following particulars: (1) In running the car at a dangerous and high rate of speed, causing plaintiff's horse to become frightened and uncontrollable, and, although in full view of the motorman, he made no effort to slacken the speed of the car, but continued such speed until the horse was injured and the damage to the buggy and harness sustained; (2) that the motorman, seeing and knowing the danger in which the horse and buggy were placed by defendant's negligence, failed to diminish the speed of the car, and continued to run it at the high speed mentioned for a distance of one-half block after striking the said horse and buggy. Ruffner, the carpenter working at the bench, was a witness and testified that the car was running at the rate of 30 miles an hour. He did not observe the horse and buggy until the horse had reared in the air, and, consequently, cannot tell us of any indications of fright given by the horse prior to that time.
Mr McIntire, the driver, is the only witness throwing any light on this question. In describing the accident, on his direct examination, he said: He further testified that the car dragged the horse and buggy in the neighborhood of 50 feet after the collision occurred. On cross examination he testified as follows: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sharples Co. v. Harding Creamery Co.
... ... ; Redick, Judge.Action by the Sharples Company against the Harding Creamery Company and others ... ...
- Sharples Company v. Harding Creamery Company
-
Olney v. Omaha & C. B. St. Ry. Co.
... ... the streets of a city by the driver of a horse and the manager of a street car are equal, and each must use it with reasonable regard for the safety ... Olney against the Omaha & Council Bluffs Street Railway Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff ... ...