Yost v. Union Pacific Railroad
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. E. E. Porterfield, Judge. (1) There was no negligence shown in the construction and maintenance of the switch at which plaintiff was injured. The evidence' shows that this switch was of a standard type adopted and generally used on defendant’s road, also on numerous other up-to-date railroads in this part of the country, and that said switch was in good repair.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. E. E. Porterfield, Judge. (1) There was no negligence shown in the construction and maintenance of the switch at which plaintiff was injured. The evidence' shows that this switch was of a standard type adopted and generally used on defendant’s road, also on numerous other up-to-date railroads in this part of the country, and that said switch was in good repair. The only negligence claimed is in the adoption and use of such a type of switch with open spaces on each side of the spread bar and underneath the same. Such adoption and construction of a…
1Opinion of the Court
BLAIR, C.
— This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by respondent while employed as a brakeman. From a judgment for $25,000 this appeal was taken. The petition alleged that .respondent’s injury resulted from the defective, *229unsafe and dangerous condition of one of appellant’s switches, at Julesburg, Colorado, and the negligent omission of appellant to warn respondent thereof. The answer consisted of (1) a general denial and then pleaded (2) contributory negligence, under the laws of Colorado, (3) the violation of a rule of appellant, (4) assumption of risk under the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Ryalls v. Mechanics' MillsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
- Gilbert v. Burlington, C. R. & N. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. CarrollSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
- Denver & R. G. R. Co. v. NorgateCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- Gmaehle v. . RosenbergNew York Court of Appeals · 1904
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- State v. AndersonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1974
- General Box Co. v. Missouri Utilities Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1932
- Rositzky v. RositzkySupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
- Keele v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1914
- Kamer v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.