Ingram's Admrx. v. Rutland Railroad
Supreme Court of Vermont
Case for negligence. Plea, the general issue. Trial by jury at the September Term, 1914, Windham County, Waterman, J., presiding. At the close of all the evidence defendant moved for a directed verdict. Motion overruled, to which defendant excepted. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepted. This ease has been once before in the Supreme Court, see 86 Vt. 550.
1Opinion of the CourtPowers, J.
Arthur Ingram, a fireman on a Boston & Maine switcher, was billed by a Rutland Railroad switcher in *280. the yard at Bellows Falls, on the evening of October 30, 1909. His .administratrix brought this action to recover damages for the alleged negligence in the handling of the Rutland switcher, and the case came before us on the pleadings, as shown by Ingram’s Admrx. v. Rutland Railroad Co., 86 Vt. 550, 86 Atl. 813. The plaintiff has now obtained a verdict in her favor, and the defendant again brings the case here on exceptions. The questions presented arise under the defendant’s motion for a…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Chicago & Erie Railroad v. DiniusIndiana Supreme Court · 1913
- Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad v. O'ConnorIllinois Supreme Court · 1886
- Pierce v. WhitcombSupreme Court of Vermont · 1875
- Sawyer v. Rutland & Burlington RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1855
- Turner v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Perkins v. Vermont Hydro-Electric Corp.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1934
- Speas v. Boone CountyNebraska Supreme Court · 1929
- Aiken v. MetcalfSupreme Court of Vermont · 1916
- Barclay v. Wetmore & Morse Granite Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1920
- Marsigli's Estate v. Granite City Auto Sales, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1964
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.