Wilson v. Grand Trunk Railway
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Exceptions to the ruling of Goddard, J., of the Superior Court. The verdict was for the plaintiff, and the defendants alleged exceptions to the rulings, which appear in the opinion, together with a sufficient statement of the material facts in the case. cited Logan v. Pontchartrain Railroad Go., 11 Rob., (La.,) 24; Redfield on Railways, 244.
1Opinion of the CourtAppleton, C. J.
The plaintiff was a passenger on board the defendants’ cars, having seasonably paid her fare. Her baggage was not with her, it having been left behind, without fault of the defendants. Some two or three days after-wards it was left in charge of their servants, to be transported to the Empire station on their line, but it never reached its place of destination. This suit is brought to recover the value of the baggage lost.
*61The presiding Justice instructed the jury, "that, if they should find that the plaintiff went on board the defendants’ road as a passenger, on Tuesday preceding, without…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Wald v. Pittsburg, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis R. R. Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1896
- Oakes v. N. P. R. R.Oregon Supreme Court · 1891
- Perry v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
- Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Railroad v. ZwirtzSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1903
- Toledo, St. Louis & Kansas City Railroad v. TappIndiana Court of Appeals · 1893
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.