L. R., M. R. & T. Ry. Co. v. Leverett
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Desha Circuit Court. Hon. J. A. Williams, Judge. ,1. The declarations of the deceased as to the manner in which he was injured were not competent. 2 Ark., M6; 97 III, 101; 24 Kans., 189. They were not admissible as part of the res gestee. 8 Wall, 397; 30 Vt, 377 47; ib.,583; 8 Conn., 263 ; 3 ib., .250 ; 41 ib., 55; 128 Mass., 422; 95 N. Y., 774• 2. The exclusion of evidence as to regulations on other railroads in regard to coupling, was error. 3. The pecuniary…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Desha Circuit Court. Hon. J. A. Williams, Judge. ,1. The declarations of the deceased as to the manner in which he was injured were not competent. 2 Ark., M6; 97 III, 101; 24 Kans., 189. They were not admissible as part of the res gestee. 8 Wall, 397; 30 Vt, 377 47; ib.,583; 8 Conn., 263 ; 3 ib., .250 ; 41 ib., 55; 128 Mass., 422; 95 N. Y., 774• 2. The exclusion of evidence as to regulations on other railroads in regard to coupling, was error. 3. The pecuniary condition of the mother, her poverty ■or wealth, could not be taken into consideration in assessing damages under the…
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
This was an action brought by Sallie L. Leverett, as administratrix of the estate of James W. Leverett, deceased, against the Little Rock, Mississippi River and Texas Railway Company, to recover damages alleged to have resulted from the negligence of the defendant in wrongfully causing the death of the deceased. . The action was brought under section 5226 of Mansfield’s Digest, to recover damages for the benefit of the next of kin of the ■deceased. ■
The negligence averred is, that defendant’s road-bed, tracks and station at the town of Arkansas City were constructed on a high embankment, with…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hough v. Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Gibson v. . Erie Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Fort Wayne, Jackson & Saginaw Railroad v. GildersleeveMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
- Elmer v. LockeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- Opsahl v. JuddSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by47 opinions
- Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. BuckIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. ColumbiaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1902
- Gregory's Adm'r v. Ohio River R'dWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1893
- Aluminum Co. of North America v. RamseySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. RogersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.