Legal Opinion

Omaha & Republican Valley Railway Co. v. Clarke

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided January 16, 1894No. 4309PublishedCited by 11 opinions

The burden of proof was upon the plaintiff. There is no evidence that the defendant’s servant, in the management of the engine, unlawfully and unnecessarily opened the valves, and frightened the plaintiff’s horses. The motion to direct a verdict for defendant should have been sustained.

Read the full summary

The burden of proof was upon the plaintiff. There is no evidence that the defendant’s servant, in the management of the engine, unlawfully and unnecessarily opened the valves, and frightened the plaintiff’s horses. The motion to direct a verdict for defendant should have been sustained. (Howard v. Union F. R. Co., 30 N. E. Rep. [Mass.], 479; Favor v. Boston & L. R. Co., 114 Mass., 350; Abbot v. Kalbus, 74 Wis., 506; Schuylkill & Dauphin Improvement Co. v. Munson, 14 Wall. [TJ. S.], 448; Morrison v. Phillips & Colby Construction Co., 44 Wis., 405; Toomey v. London, B. & S. C. R. Co., 3 C. B.,…

1Opinion of the Court

Irvine, C.

An opinion in this case affirming the judgment of the district court was filed December 20,1892, and is reported in 35 Neb., 867. A rehearing has been granted upon the question of the sufficiency of the evidence, the question being raised upon the proof of negligence upon the part of the plaintiff in error. The statement of facts in the farmer opinion suffices, without much by way of addition, for this.

The facts alleged for the purpose of establishing negligence on the part of the plaintiff in error may be analyzed as follows:

First — That the railroad company negligently permitted…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. LandauerNebraska Supreme Court · 1893
  2. American Water-Works Co. v. DoughertyNebraska Supreme Court · 1893
  3. City of Lincoln v. GillilanNebraska Supreme Court · 1885
  4. Kilpatrick v. RichardsonNebraska Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Foxworthy v. City of HastingsNebraska Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. City of Omaha v. BowmanNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Bixby v. AyersNebraska Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Anderson v. Interstate Transit LinesNebraska Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Estate of Block v. Estate of BeckerNebraska Supreme Court · 2023
  5. Omaha Street Railway Co. v. EmmingerNebraska Supreme Court · 1898

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API