H. & T. C. R'y Co. v. Rider
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Dallas. Tried below before the Hon. Geo. N. Aldredge. The opinion sufficiently states the facts. The verdict was against the company for $4,000. It was contended that the injury was inflicted on plaintiff at a time when plaintiff was not actually engaged in service, and when his time was his own, and that it was the result of the negligence of the manager of the train in not giving signals.
1Opinion of the Court
Stayton, Associate Justice.
The testimony offered for the plaintiff, which is not controverted by any which appears in the record, shows that the plaintiff was in the employment of the railway companay as section hand, and that he and others, in the performance of the duties which such employment embraced, had been engaged in repairing the railway and removing a wreck therefrom, and that after having done this they were returning to the section house at which they usually staid.
Prom the section house to Miller’s Station they had gone towards-the wreck on a hand-car, but on reaching Miller’s…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dallas v. G., Col. & S. F. R'y Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1884
3Cited by22 opinions
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. HamblySupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Hughes v. Atlanta Steel Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1911
- Grattis v. Kansas City, Pittsburg & Gulf RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1900
- Comminge & Geisler v. StevensonTexas Supreme Court · 1890
- Frint Motor Car Co. v. Industrial CommissionWisconsin Supreme Court · 1919
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.