Rosenbaum v. St. Paul & Duluth Railroad
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Ramsey county, to recover damages for personal injuries received while in the defendant’s employment. It was admitted that the plaintiff was injured by the derailment of a car in the defendant’s construction train, upon which car the plaintiff was riding. The action was tried before Brill, J„ and a jury, and plaintiff had a verdict. Defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.
1. The presumption of law is that persons riding on construction trains, and not employed in actual service thereon or in connection therewith, are not lawfully there, and, if permitted to be there by the employes of the company, the presumption is against their authority to bind the company. Waterbury v. New York Cent., etc., R. Co., 17 Fed. Rep. 671; Prince v. International, etc., Ry. Co., 64 Tex. 144. But this presumption may be overcome by special circumstances; as where, for instance, the company is in the habit of allowing its employes to ride on such trains to and from their work or…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Prince v. I. & G. N. R'y Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1885
- Shoemaker v. KingsburySupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- Hazard v. Chicago, B. & Q. R.U.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois · 1865
3Cited by20 opinions
- Nesbitt v. Twin City Forge & Foundry Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
- Peterson v. Seattle Traction Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1900
- Denver & Berkeley Park Rapid Transit Co. v. DwyerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1894
- Simmons v. Oregon RailroadOregon Supreme Court · 1902
- Thomas v. Wisconsin Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.