Legal Opinion

Quimby v. Vermont Central Railroad

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided March 15, 1851PublishedCited by 15 opinions

Trespass on the Case for want of care by the defendants’ servant in the management of their locomotive engine, whereby the plaintiff’s mare and colt were killed. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury, December Term, 1850, — Collamer, J., presiding.

Read the full summary

Trespass on the Case for want of care by the defendants’ servant in the management of their locomotive engine, whereby the plaintiff’s mare and colt were killed. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury, December Term, 1850, — Collamer, J., presiding. On trial the plaintiff gave evidence tending to prove, that in July, 1849, he was the owner of a mare and colt, which were in the possession of his father, Colcord Q,uimby ; that Colcord Quirnby resided on a farm in Sharon, through which the defendants’ rail road was located and constructed; that in constructing their rail road the defendants…

1Opinion of the Court

*393The opinion of the court was delivered by

Redfiemo, J.

1. The court have not deemed it necessary to go into the inquiry, in this case, whether, upon the facts stated in the bill of exceptions, the defendants’ right to the land, where the injury occurred, had so vested, that they might rightfully occupy the same. The very action pre-supposes, that the company were rightfully occupying the land ; else the action must be trespass, and not case.

2. In regard to the obligation to fence the land, we think the rule adopted by the court below was as favorable, as the defendants could ask. That is…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In re Rensselaer & Saratoga RailroadNew York Court of Chancery · 1834

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Thorpe v. Rutland & Burlington RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
  2. Trow v. Vermont Central RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1852
  3. Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne, & Chicago Railway Co. v. RubyIndiana Supreme Court · 1871
  4. Winona & St. Peter R. R. v. WaldronSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1866
  5. Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. NovakCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1894

10 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