Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. McCarty
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error, from the district court of Douglas county. Tried below before Davis, J. The facts and issues appear in the opinion. The petition does not state a cause of action.
Read the full summary
Error, from the district court of Douglas county. Tried below before Davis, J. The facts and issues appear in the opinion. The petition does not state a cause of action. It is not alleged therein that defendant in error was ignorant of the danger of complying with the order of the foreman, or that the danger was not connected with, or was not within the scope of, his employment Admitting the facts alleged in the petition to be true, the defendant in error cannot recover unless the danger was unknown to him and not within the scope of his employment. (Indianapolis & St. L. R. Go. v. Watson,…
1Opinion of the Court
Irvine, C.
This was an action by McCarty against the railway company to recover for personal injuries sustained by McCarty while in the employ of the company. He recovered a judgment for $10,000. The railway company, by petition in error, seeks to reverse this judgment. McCarty, by cross-petition in error, seeks also to reverse it, on the ground of error in sustaining a motion for a new trial after a former verdict in his favor for $15,000, and to have judgment entered on such former verdict.
The cross-petition in error may be briefly disposed of. The motion for a new trial after the first…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. TietkenNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
3Cited by9 opinions
- Grimm v. Omaha Electric Light & Power Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1907
- Standard Distilling & Distributing Co. v. HarrisNebraska Supreme Court · 1906
- Clairmont v. CilleySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1931
- Kerlin v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1910
- Kotera v. American Smelting & Refining Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1908
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.