Legal Opinion

Hasty v. Pittsburg County Ry. Co.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided July 7, 1925No. 13419PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

ESTES, C.

Parties appear in the same order as in the trial court. Plaintiff sued defendant street railway company for damages for personal injuries, alleging various acts of negligence. Judgment was for defendant on verdict of jury. Second street runs north and south in the city of McAlester and crosses Electric avenue running east and west. Defendant’s street railway line is located on the south side of said Electric avenue. About noon on Sunday, plaintiff, Maude Hasty, and her husband started north on said 'Second street in the automobile owned and driven by the husband, plaintiff…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Cotton v. Willmar & Sioux Falls Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  2. Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. CreekIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
  3. St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. BellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
  4. Kokesh v. PriceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
  5. Hoag v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1888

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Franklin v. SheltonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1957
  2. Woolfolk v. SemrodSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1960
  3. Stillwater Milling Co. v. TemplinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938
  4. Pridgin v. WilkinsonCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1961
  5. Sand Springs Railway Co. v. McWilliamsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API