Richmond & Danville Railroad v. Burnsed
Mississippi Supreme Court
From tlie circuit court of the first district of Carroll county. Hon. C. H. Campbell, Judge. Action by appellee, Burnsed, against the appellant company, to recover damages for personal injuries. He received the injuries complained of by leaping from a running freight-train of defendant to avoid an impending collision with a passenger-train.
Read the full summary
From tlie circuit court of the first district of Carroll county. Hon. C. H. Campbell, Judge. Action by appellee, Burnsed, against the appellant company, to recover damages for personal injuries. He received the injuries complained of by leaping from a running freight-train of defendant to avoid an impending collision with a passenger-train. It is not contended, in behalf of the railroad company, that plaintiff’s leaping from the train was not made necessary by the apparent imminent danger of the collision, this having been brought about in consequence of the absence of proper signals. The…
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, J.
The appellee’s theory of the case, as disclosed in his declaration, is that he was a passenger on a freight-train by virtue of a contract of carriage of stock made with the appellant, under which he was entitled to free transportation because of his ownership of a part of the mules. The appellee’s evidence utterly fails to support his theory. . It is manifest that the stock was owned by Gresham and Loudon, and that the contract of carriage was made with Gresham alone. It is equally certain that Gresham’s name alone appeared in the bill of lading, and that he alone was by the contract entitled…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Toledo, Wabash & Western Railway Co. v. BeggsIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
- Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. PhillipsIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
- Toledo, Wabash & Western Railway Co. v. BrooksIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
- Powers v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Chicago & Alton Railroad v. MichieIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Morgan v. Oregon Short Line RailroadUtah Supreme Court · 1903
- Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. StoneSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. DeesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- M'Neill v. Durham & Charlotte RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
- Burks v. Yazoo & M. v. R. R.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1929
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.