O'Neil v. Town of East Windsor
Supreme Court of Connecticut
ACTION to recover for an injury to the plaintiff’s horse, through a defect in a highway of the defendant town; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Hartford County, and tried to the court upon a general denial. Facts found and ease reserved for advice. The case is fully stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtAndrews, C. J.
In this action the plaintiff claimed to recover the value of a horse which he alleged had been injured by reason of a defective highway which it was the duty of the defendant town to keep in repair. The case was heard in the Court of Common Pleas in Hartford County and reserved for the advice of this court upon a finding of the following facts:—
About seven-thirty o’clock of the evening of January 5th, 1892, the plaintiff’s son, engaged in the plaintiff’s business, was driving a pair of the plaintiff’s horses attached to an empty farm wagon on a highway belonging to the defendant town. The…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Farrell v. Waterbury Horse R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1891
- Mad River & Lake Erie Railroad v. BarberOhio Supreme Court · 1856
- Nolan v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1885
- Baltimore & Susquehanna Rail Road v. WoodruffCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1853
- Schoonmaker v. Albertson & Douglass Machine Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1884
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Dean v. HershowitzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- Bunnell v. Berlin Iron Bridge Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
- Littlejohn v. Midland Valley R. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Quinn v. O'KeeffeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- City of Shawnee v. DrakeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.