Legal Opinion

Blair v. B. O. R.R. Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 23, 1944PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Plaintiff sued under the Federal Employers' Liability Act of April 22, 1908, c. 149, 35 Stat. 65, 45 USCA 51 et seq. After a trial in which he got a verdict, a new trial was granted, as the learned trial judge explained, because he had submitted to the jury defendant's liability for ". . . failure to provide adequate equipment for the work; failure to provide sufficient help, and carelessness of its employees . . ."; he stated that after reflection he had concluded that there was no evidence to support a finding of inadequate equipment or insufficient help and therefore a new trial was…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Guerierro v. Reading CompanySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  2. Pennsylvania R. v. BrubakerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1929
  3. Detroit, G. H. & M. Ry. Co. v. MaldonadoCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1932
  4. Cacchione v. Hagan & Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1915
  5. Reusch v. GroetzingerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Blair v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Schirra v. Delaware, L. & WR Co.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1952
  3. Cutler v. Peck Lumber Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1944

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API