Legal Opinion

Boldt v. . New York Central Railroad Company.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided December 5, 1858PublishedCited by 25 opinions

Appeal from the Supreme Court. Action for damages incurred by the plaintiff from the alleged negligence of the defendant’s servants in running a locomotive upon him. Upon the trial it appeared that the defendant was engaged in the construction of a new track parallel to- and about six feet distant from its old track, which was then in use.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Supreme Court. Action for damages incurred by the plaintiff from the alleged negligence of the defendant’s servants in running a locomotive upon him. Upon the trial it appeared that the defendant was engaged in the construction of a new track parallel to- and about six feet distant from its old track, which was then in use. At the time of the accident the new track had not been completed, and no trains had run upon it, except some conveying gravel for ballasting. The plaintiff was a laborer who had been employed about a month, under the direction of an agent of the defendant,…

1Opinion of the Court

Johnson, Ch. J.

The general rule that an employer is not responsible to one employee for injury occasioned by another employee, engaged in the same general undertaking, is firmly settled in this state. (Sherman v. Rochester and Syracuse Railroad Company, 17 N. Y., 153; Russell v. Hudson River Railroad Company, id., 134, and cases there cited.) The plaintiff was employed to labor in graveling and ballasting a new track, which was on the same road-bed with and about six feet distant from the old track, and was injured by a train of cars of the defendants running on the new track, on which no…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Sherman v. . the Rochester and Syracuse R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1858

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Lamphere v. Oregon R. & Nav. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1912
  2. Ewald v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Wilson v. Madison R. R.Indiana Supreme Court · 1862
  4. N. O., J. & G. N. R. R. Co. v. HughesMississippi Supreme Court · 1873
  5. Thomas v. Wisconsin Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1909

20 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