Cato v. Atlanta & C. A. L. Ry. Co.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
1Dissent
In my opinion, the motion of the defendants for a directed verdict in their favor should have been granted; the judgment of the Circuit Court should therefore be reversed, and the case remanded to that Court for the entry of judgment in favor of the defendants under Rule 27.
The undisputed facts of the case, summarized, are substantially as follows:
The plaintiff's intestate, O.C. Cato, on December 6, 1929, was employed by the defendant Southern Railway Company as a car repairer in the railroad yard at Hayne, near Spartanburg (the Hayne yard must not be confused with theHayne shops, which were…
2Cases cited54 opinions
- Messenger v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Shanks v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Illinois Central Railroad v. BehrensSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- St. Louis, San Francisco & Texas Railway Co. v. SealeSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Hertz v. WoodmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.