Legal Opinion

Hartvig v. N. P. L. Co.

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided November 10, 1890PublishedCited by 28 opinions

Appeal from Multnomah county: E.D. Shattuck, judge

1Opinion of the CourtLord, J.

This is an action to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff on account of the negligence of thd defendant, its agents and servants. The only error complained of is the refusal of the court to grant a motion for non-suit interposed by the defendant. In substance the facts are these: The plaintiff was an ordinary laborer on the night force at bhe defendant’s saw mill, who was engaged with other laborers at the foot of *523the lumber chute for the purpose of removing lumber as it descended to the foot of the chute and distributing it about the yard. On the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Milwaukee & Saint Paul Railway Co. v. KelloggSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Anderson v. BennettOregon Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Nelson v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1882
  4. Jucker v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Ransier v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1884

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Fazzolari v. Portland School District No. 1JOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Knahtla v. Oregon Short Line, etc., Ry. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Bain v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Nutt v. Southern Pacific Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Wallace v. Suburban Railway Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1894

23 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