Teal v. American Mining Company
| Decision Date | 08 November 1901 |
| Docket Number | 12,678 - (33) |
| Citation | 87 N.W. 837,84 Minn. 320 |
| Parties | WILLIAM J. TEAL v. AMERICAN MINING COMPANY and Another |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Action in the district court for Hennepin county against the American Mining Company and the Eastern Railway Company of Minnesota to recover $35,000 for personal injuries. From an order, Elliott, J., overruling its demurrer to the amended complaint, defendant railway company appealed. Affirmed.
Inspection of Car by Railway -- Connecting Carrier.
A railway carrier transferring a car of its own to a connecting carrier for use upon its line owes to the servants of the latter the duty of exercising due care in inspecting and putting the car in a reasonably safe condition for the proposed use. The negligence of the latter in receiving and using the car cannot relieve the former from liability for an injury to such servants, caused by a defective car negligently transferred by it. Rule applied, and held, that the complaint herein states a cause of action as to each of the defendants.
W. E Dodge, for appellant.
Daly & Barnard, for respondent.
This is an appeal from an order overruling the demurrer of the defendant railway company to the plaintiff's amended complaint.
The here material allegations of the complaint are substantially these: The defendant mining company, during the time herein stated, maintained and operated a railway line from its mines in the county of St. Louis to the city of Virginia, in such county, for the purpose of transporting its ore in freight cars over its line to the city, and there delivering the loaded cars to the defendant railway company, to be by it transported over its railway line to certain docks on the shore of Lake Superior. In the conduct of such business the defendants used in common the railroad yards of the railway company in the city of Virginia, and the latter company furnished its cars to the mining company for its and its employees' use in so transporting its ore. On November 16, 1899, the railway company transferred a car, which it then knew to be unsafe by reason of a defective brake wheel thereon, to the mining company's line, to be used by the employees of the latter in so operating its railway line, and also knowing that such employees would be compelled, in the performance of their duties, to use the unsafe car, whereby they would be exposed to unnecessary danger. The mining company carelessly and negligently received such unsafe and defective car upon its line, and carelessly and negligently permitted it to remain in such condition until after the accident and injury, by reason of the defects in the car, to the plaintiff, who was then employed by it as a brakeman in operating its railway line. The complaint then alleges that the plaintiff was injured, and the manner and extent thereof while in the line of his duty as such brakeman, by reason of the defective brake wheel on the car in question.
The reason urged on behalf of the railway company why the complaint does not state a cause of...
To continue reading
Request your trial