Legal Opinion

Claude Mack v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Company

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided October 24, 1960No. 13238PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The appeal at bar is without merit. It is clear that the appellant, Mack, when he sustained his injuries, was a trespasser on the Railroad’s prop erty, and that, as such, he was within the purview of N.J.S.A. 48:12-152 which, in substance, is a bar to recovery by trespassers, against a railroad, based upon the negligence of the latter. As the defendant Railroad conceded at pretrial, it cannot invoke the provisions of this statute if it wilfully and wantonly injured the plaintiff. Kowaleski v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 3 Cir., 103 F.2d 827, certiorari denied 1939, 308 U.S. 556, 60 S.Ct. 95,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Egan v. Erie RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1959
  2. Staub v. Public Service Railway Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1922
  3. Rinn v. Asbestos Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
  4. Kowaleski v. Pennsylvania R.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Potter v. Charles v. Finch & SonsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1978
  2. Potter v. Charles v. Finch & SonsSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API