Davis v. Cleveland Ry. Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtZimmerman, J.
Should the judgment for the defendant herein-stand?
There is general agreement among the authorities that mere fright, unaccompanied or followed by physical injury, does not form the basis for a cause of action. But the cases are in hopeless conflict as to whether there is a right of recovery for physical injury, disability, or illness resulting from fright caused by a negligent act. Probably no question connected with the law of negligence has given rise to so much difference of opinion.
Those courts which deny recovery give one or more of the following reasons for their decisions: (1) Since…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. HayterTexas Supreme Court · 1900
- Lambert v. BrewsterWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1924
- McCardle v. George B. Peck Dry Goods Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1917
3Cited by11 opinions
- Columbus Finance, Inc. v. HowardOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- Schultz v. Barberton Glass Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1983
- D'Ambra v. United StatesSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1975
- Boston v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1945
- Brownlee v. PrattOhio Court of Appeals · 1946
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.