Shea v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBarlow, J.
Respondents contend that the question in this case is whether there is credible evidence to sustain the findings that the conductor of the train was negligent as to lookout and warning. In passing on this question, it is necessary to determine what right, if any, the respondent had to place himself in the position he was in and what duty the conductor failed to perform to be guilty of causal negligence.
Allowing for the tender age of the respondent, it must be conceded that he had no right tO’ crawl under the train even though it was stationary at the time he attempted to do so. He had never…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Klix v. NiemanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
- Schug v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
- Kaproli v. Central R.R. of N.J.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1928
- Frederick v. Great Northern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1932
- Wendorf v. Director General of RailroadsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1920
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Szafranski v. RadetzkyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
- Copeland v. LarsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
- Anderson v. Green Bay & Western RailroadCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1980
- Dodwell Ex Rel. Williams v. Missouri Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1964
- Kretchman v. ReidWisconsin Supreme Court · 1970
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.