Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Bourman
Supreme Court of the United States
IN ERROR TO THE' CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE • frlFTH CIRCUIT,' The facts are stated in the opinion. Plaintiff’s injury was not due to. any negligence .on the part of the railway company. A plaintiff, in the first instance, must show negligence on, the part of the defendant. Thenegligence of a defendant, as stated in that' case, cannot be inferred from a presumption of care on the part of the person injured.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR TO THE' CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE • frlFTH CIRCUIT,' The facts are stated in the opinion. Plaintiff’s injury was not due to. any negligence .on the part of the railway company. A plaintiff, in the first instance, must show negligence on, the part of the defendant. Thenegligence of a defendant, as stated in that' case, cannot be inferred from a presumption of care on the part of the person injured. A presumption in the performance of duty attends the defendant as well as the person injured. It must be overcome "by direct evidence. Looney v. Metropolitan R. R. Co., 200 U. S.…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Moody
The .defendant in error, hereafter called the plaintiff, brought an action in the Circuit Court of the United States against' the plaintiff in error, hereafter called, the defendant, to recover damages fot injuries alleged.to have been suffered through the defendant’s negligence. The plaintiff.had a verdict, which was affirmed by the Circuit'Court of Appeals, and under existing statutes regulating the jurisdiction of this court the defendant, because it is incorporated under, a law of the United States, has a further appeal, and brings the judgment here by writ of error.
■ The facts of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. BaughSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. PetersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. HamblySupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- New England Railroad v. ConroySupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. CharlessSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Black & White Taxicab & Transfer Co. v. Brown & Yellow Taxicab & Transfer Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Beutler v. Grand Trunk Junction Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Anderson v. Pittsburgh Coal Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
- Southern Ry. Co. v. TaylorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1926
- Union Pac. R. v. MaroneCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1917
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.