Memphis St. Ry Co. v. Cavell
Tennessee Supreme Court
FROM SHELBY. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Shelby County to the Court of Civil Appeals, and by certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals from The Supreme Court. — J. P. Young, Judge.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Buchanan
The court of civil appeals affirmed a judgment rendered by the circuit court of Shelby county in favor of Cavell for the sum of $8,500, against the railway company, and the latter, by its petition for certiorari, seeks a review and reversal of the judgment of the court of civil appeals.
*465The point made by the assignment of error is that the court charged the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, and that this doctrine can never apply where there is a collision between a vehicle belonging to the defendant and one belonging to some other party.
We will first consider the assignment upon the hypothesis…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Sweeney v. ErvingSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Inland & Seaboard Coasting Co. v. TolsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Stokes v. SaltonstallSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- Gleeson v. Virginia Midland RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Gill v. WellsSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- North Memphis Sav. Bank v. Union Bridge & Construction Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1917
- Armes Ex Rel. Armes v. HulettCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1992
- Elmore v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1931
- Smith v. FisherCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1929
- Park v. Sinclair Refining Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1940
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.