Heine v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Sauk County. The facts are stated in the opinion. At the close of the testimony, the court directed a verdict in favor of the defendant, and from the judgment entered thereon, dismissing •the complaint, the plaintiff appealed. contended, inter alia, that the plaintiff and the conductor were not co-employees in a -common service. PTo service is “ common ” which does not admit of common participation.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Sauk County. The facts are stated in the opinion. At the close of the testimony, the court directed a verdict in favor of the defendant, and from the judgment entered thereon, dismissing •the complaint, the plaintiff appealed. contended, inter alia, that the plaintiff and the conductor were not co-employees in a -common service. PTo service is “ common ” which does not admit of common participation. The only service in which the conductor was engaged was the control of the train, and in this the plaintiff did not and could not participate. The •conductor…
1Opinion of the CourtTaylor, J.
This action was brought by the appellant to recover damages for injuries received while at work for the respondent as a common laborer. The appellant, with a large number of other men, was at work for the respondent near Cottage Grove “ surfacing track; ” that is, filling the dirt and gravel between the ties, and dressing up the surface. The gravel used was brought by a train of flat cars in charge of a conductor and the usual train hands. It was the duty of the men engaged in “ surfacing” to get upon the cars, when the gravel train came up, and shovel off the gravel. The. men engaged in…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Brabbits v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1875
- Schultz v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
- Bessex v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1878
- State v. MalsterCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1881
- Stetler v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1879
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Nadau v. White River Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1890
- Ewald v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
- Peschel v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1885
- Jackson v. Norfolk & W. R.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1897
- New Pittsburgh Coal & Coke Co. v. PetersonIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.