Toledo, St. L. & W. R. v. Bartley
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Ohio. This was an action brought in the Circuit Court of the United States, Northern District of Ohio, to recover damages for personal injuries. It was brought by Earl Bartley (a minor, 16 years old), through his guardian, against Toledo, St. Louis & Western Railroad Company and Detroit & Toledo Shore Line Railroad Company; jurisdiction having been obtained through diverse citizenship.
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Ohio. This was an action brought in the Circuit Court of the United States, Northern District of Ohio, to recover damages for personal injuries. It was brought by Earl Bartley (a minor, 16 years old), through his guardian, against Toledo, St. Louis & Western Railroad Company and Detroit & Toledo Shore Line Railroad Company; jurisdiction having been obtained through diverse citizenship. The cause of action, in substance, was: That on October 19, 1905, under some contract not known to plaintiff, the defendants…
1Opinion of the CourtWarrington, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). There are five leading complaints of error. They relate, first, to the alleged custom or rule of the yard to give notice before commencing any movement of cars; and, second, to the court’s refusal: (1) to direct verdict for both defendants; (2) either to grant special instructions stating, or in the general charge to state, that plaintiff was bound to look and listen before attempting to cross the track; (3) to grant certain special charges touching plaintiff’s infancy; and (4) on its separate motion to direct verdict for the Toledo, St. Eouis & Western on…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. IvesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Aerkfetz v. HumphreysSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Elliott v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. FreemanSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. GriffithSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- St. Louis & S. F. Ry. Co. v. JeffriesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1921
- Pacheco v. New York, N. H. & H. R.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
- Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. BaldwinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1930
- Sumney v. Southern Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1937
- Frazier v. Interstate R.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1920
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.