Legal Opinion

Erskine v. Chino Val. Beet-Sugar Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern California

Decided December 20, 1895No. 655PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Action by Maria S. Erskine, executrix of the last will of Wilbur P. Erskine, against the Chino Valley Beet-Sugar Company, a corporation. On motion by defendant for peremptory instructions. Plaintiff, as executrix of the last will of her late husband, Wilbur E. Erskine, deceased, brought this action to recover of the defendant damages for the death of said Erskine.

Read the full summary

Action by Maria S. Erskine, executrix of the last will of Wilbur P. Erskine, against the Chino Valley Beet-Sugar Company, a corporation. On motion by defendant for peremptory instructions. Plaintiff, as executrix of the last will of her late husband, Wilbur E. Erskine, deceased, brought this action to recover of the defendant damages for the death of said Erskine. Upon the trial of the case, and at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence, the defendant moved the court to instruct the jury to return a verdict for the defendant. The proof showed that deceased was killed on November 9, 1894. At…

1Opinion of the Court

WELLBORN, District Judge.

The grounds upon which the defendant moves the court for peremptory instructions, although more numerously stated in the motion itself, may be comprehended under three heads, as follows: First, that the evidence fails to establish the representative capacity of the plaintiff, or, in other words, that she is the duly appointed and qualified executrix of the last will *271of the deceased, Wilbur F. Ersldne; second, that the evidence fails to show negligence on the part of the defendant; third, that the evidence does show contributory negligence of the deceased.

J. With…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Consolidated Stone Co. v. RedmonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1899
  2. American Coal Mining Co. v. LewisIndiana Court of Appeals · 1922
  3. Brunell v. Southern Pacific Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Davey v. Hall & Munson Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1899
  5. Thompson v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1911

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API