Thomas v. Pocatello Power & Irrigation Co.
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Bannock County. We contend that in the light of both principle and the overwhelming weight of authority, the record shows, no negligence on the part of the defendant. That, therefore, the verdict of the jury is not supported by the evidence. (Robinson v. 0. 8. L. By. Go., 7 Utah, 493, 27 Pac. 689; George v. Los Angeles By. Go., 126 Cal. 357, 77 Am. St. Eep. 184, 58 Pac. 819; A. T. & 8. F. Go. v. Potter, 60 Kan. 808, 72 Am.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Bannock County. We contend that in the light of both principle and the overwhelming weight of authority, the record shows, no negligence on the part of the defendant. That, therefore, the verdict of the jury is not supported by the evidence. (Robinson v. 0. 8. L. By. Go., 7 Utah, 493, 27 Pac. 689; George v. Los Angeles By. Go., 126 Cal. 357, 77 Am. St. Eep. 184, 58 Pac. 819; A. T. & 8. F. Go. v. Potter, 60 Kan. 808, 72 Am. Eep. 385, 58 Pae. 471 -¡Omaha v. Bowman, 52 Neb. 293, 66 Am. St. Eep. 506, 72 N. W. 316, 40 L. E. A. 531; Bitz v. Wheeling, 45 W. Ya. 262, 31 S.…
1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.
This is an action brought by the respondent to recover for the death of his minor son, alleged to have been drowned in the canal of appellant by reason of its carelessness and negligence in constructing and maintaining a walk across said canal. The cause was tried before a jury, and a verdict was rendered in favor of the respondent for the sum of $1,975, and judgment entered for that amount. A motion for a new trial was denied. This appeal is from the judgment and order denying a new trial. It is shown that the appellant constructed a foot bridge in question for its own use and convenience.…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Bass v. Quinn-Robbins Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1950
- York v. Pacific & Northern Railway Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1902
- Chase v. Washington Water Power Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1941
- Linderman v. CarminMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910