Boyd v. Harris
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 212, Jan. T., 1896, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. Cumberland Co., on verdict for plaintiff. Trespass for death of plaintiff’s husband. At the trial it appeared that on February 17, 1895, at about nine o’clock in the evening, Robert S. Boyd, plaintiff’s husband, a brakeman in the employ of the defendants, was killed at Leesburg station.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 212, Jan. T., 1896, by defendants, from judgment of C. P. Cumberland Co., on verdict for plaintiff. Trespass for death of plaintiff’s husband. At the trial it appeared that on February 17, 1895, at about nine o’clock in the evening, Robert S. Boyd, plaintiff’s husband, a brakeman in the employ of the defendants, was killed at Leesburg station. The accident was caused by the deceased colliding with a cattle chute which was alleged to have been located dangerously near to a siding. There was some evidence tending to show that the track of the siding had been brought nearer to the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Williams,
This case presents a question, the importance of -which extends far beyond the present parties and the judgment to be entered herein. It is whether the location of the permanent structures along a line of railroad necessary to accommodate its business is to be determined by the railroad company or by a petit jury. If by the former, they may be located with reference to the convenient and economical use of the railroad and the accommodation of its traffic. If b}r the latter, these considerations will be lost sight of, and the proper location will be a shifting…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Gibson v. . Erie Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Lovejoy v. Boston & Lowell RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Brossman v. Lehigh Valley RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
- Pittsburgh & Connellsville Railroad v. SentmeyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
- Schall v. ColeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Phoenix Printing Co. v. DurhamSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Magyar v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. RileyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1906
- Bates v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- Taylor v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1919
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.