Temple Cotton Oil Co. v. Brown
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1DissentMehaffy, J.
The opinion of the majority states. ££We think the court erred in refusing to direct a verdict for appellant at its request for any one of two or three reasons: (1) That no actionable negligence is shown; and (2) that if so, appellee assumed the risk as a matter of law; and (3) that he suffered no substantial injury. ’ ’
I cannot agree with the majority on any one of these propositions, and I shall endeavor to give my reasons for disagreeing.
It is first stated that there is no actionable negligence shown, and if this were true, the decision of the court would be correct. But we have many times…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Rocco v. Lehigh Valley RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. RogersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Missouri Pacific R.R. Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1939
- St. Louis S.W. Ry. Co. v. Braswell, AdministratorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1939
- American Railway Express Co. v. MackleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.