Robinson v. Louisville Ry. Co.
Decision Date | 17 December 1901 |
Docket Number | 979. |
Citation | 112 F. 484 |
Parties | ROBINSON v. LOUISVILLE RY. CO. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Bennett H. Young and Marion W. Ripy, for plaintiff in error.
Fairleigh Straus & Eagles (David W. Fairleigh, of counsel), for defendant in error.
The Louisville Railway Company operates a street railroad on Portland avenue, a much-traveled street, in the city of Louisville, where the plaintiff was riding on the back of a heavily loaded wagon, being driven in an easterly direction by one Green, his employer, in the track of the defendant, on the evening of September 22, 1899, when an electric car going in the same direction collided with the wagon, throwing the plaintiff to the ground and injuring him. At Twenty-Third street, and within a few feet of where the accident occurred was an electric street light. The plaintiff saw the approaching car some two blocks away, and gave notice to the driver, who turned his horses out of the track, but before the wagon was clear the car struck it, overturning the wagon and injuring the plaintiff. The motorman testified that the car was not going more than three or four miles an hour, and that it was so dark he did not see the wagon until he was within about 30 feet of it, when he was unable to stop the car before the collision. Witnesses testified that they saw the wagon 125 or 200 feet away, and that there was no obstruction to the view for several blocks. Two witnesses testified that the car was going at a high rate of speed, but the court would not allow them to tell what the speed was, because they were not shown to be experts.
The court instructed the jury that the defendant's negligence, for which a recovery could be had, must be limited to the time after which the motorman discovered the wagon on the track, in the following words: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Action v. Fargo & Moorhead Street Railway Company
... ... & Light Co. 23 ... Ky. L. Rep. 1077, 64 S.W. 653; Richmond Pass. & Power Co ... v. Allen, 103 Va. 532, 49 S.E. 656; Greene v ... Louisville R. Co. 119 Ky. 862, 84 S.W. 1154, 7 A. & E ... Ann. Cas. 1126; Schilling v. Metropolitan Street R ... Co. 47 A.D. 500, 62 N.Y.S. 403; Moritz ... 62 N.Y.S. 403; Shea v. Potrero & B. V. R. Co. 44 ... Cal. 414; Mahoney v. San Francisco & S. M. R. Co ... 110 Cal. 471, 42 P. 968; Robinson v. Louisville R ... Co., 50 C.C.A. 357, 112 F. 484; Tashjian v ... Worcester Consol. Street R. Co. 177 Mass. 75, 58 N.E ... 281; Tacoma R ... ...
-
Deitring v. St. Louis Transit Company
... ... Schafstette v. Railway, 175 Mo. 152, 74 S.W. 826; ... Riska v. Railway, 180 Mo. 168, 79 S.W. 445; Hays ... v. Railway, 106 F. 48; Robinson v. Railway, 112 ... F. 484; Railway v. Whitcomb, 66 F. 915; Lapontey ... v. Carthage Co., 116 Mich. 514; O'Neil v ... Railroad, 129 N.Y ... ...
-
Meng v. St. Louis & Suburban Railway Company
... ... Railway, 172 Mo. 678, 72 S.W. 900; ... Hutchinson v. Railway, 88 Mo.App. 383; Grocery ... Co. v. Railway, 89 Mo.App. 391; Robinson v ... Railway, 112 F. 484. (3) If it was negligence on the ... part of plaintiff (which we positively deny), in driving ... across defendant's ... ...
-
Indianapolis Street Railway Co. v. Tenner
... ... Robinson, C. J., Comstock, P. J., Black and Henley, JJ., ... concur. Roby, J., dissents ... ... OPINION ... [67 N.E. 1045] ... R. Co. v. Hill, 7 Ind.App. 255, 34 N.E. 646; ... Cincinnati, etc., R. Co. v. Grames, 8 ... Ind.App. 112, 34 N.E. 613; Louisville, etc., R. Co ... v. Williams, 20 Ind.App. 576, 51 N.E. 128; Lake ... Shore, etc., R. Co. v. McIntosh, 140 Ind. 261, ... 38 N.E. 476; ... ...