Kroy v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. R.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Scott District Court. Claus Rroy was ia the employ of defendant as a brakeman, and, as is claimed, while in the discharge of his duty, and in the exercise of ordinary care, was killed by the carelessness and negligence of defendant. Plaintiff, the administratrix, sues for the injury to the estate. Jury trial. Yerdiet and judgment for plaintiff for $3,000. Motion for new trial overruled. Defendant appeals. The necessary facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Day, Oh. J.
I. The point first presented, and mainly insisted upon by appellant, is, that the verdict is not supported by the evidence.
There is but little conflict in the testimony bearing upon the principal points in the case. In discussing the question under consideration we shall regard every material fact affecting the liability of defendant, to which the testimony is directed, as proved. Thus considered, the testimony establishes the following facts :
In December, 1868, Olaus Kroy was head brakeman on a freight train of defendant, in which employment he had been engaged three or four…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Mad River & Lake Erie Railroad v. BarberOhio Supreme Court · 1856
- Greenleaf v. Illinois Central RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1870
- Hunt v. Chicago & N. W. R. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1868
3Cited by37 opinions
- Indianapolis & St. Louis Railway Co v. WatsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
- Indianapolis & Greenfield Rapid Transit Co. v. ForemanIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
- Muldowney v. Ill. Cent. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1873
- Greene v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Huggard v. Glucose Sugar Refining Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1906
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.