Railway Exp. Agency, Inc. v. Cox

It is difficult to reconcile an affirmance of the judgment under review with this court’s opinion that is reported in 179 F.2d 593, 596. On the former appeal, this court said that if the defendant was guilty of negligence, which was the proximate cause of the accident, it was in. the furnishing of a holster that the recipient could not be reasonably expected to fasten. A question of fact, the court said, was presented as to> whether the appellee could have been reasonably expected to fasten the holster, before the jury could find that the issuance of the pistol without the hammer resting on…