Balt. & Ohio R. v. Colvin
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR TO THE COURT OP COMMON PLEAS NO. 2 OP ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 114 October Term 1887, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 533 July Term 1886. The action below was in case for negligence by James Colvin against the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company to recover damages for personal injuries.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE COURT OP COMMON PLEAS NO. 2 OP ALLEGHENY COUNTY. No. 114 October Term 1887, Sup. Ct.; court below, No. 533 July Term 1886. The action below was in case for negligence by James Colvin against the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company to recover damages for personal injuries. The declaration, which was in two counts substantially the same, after averring the duty of the defendant company in the management of its trains at a crossing on Ross street, in Pittsburgh, and the driving by the plaintiff along said highway, charged: Yet the defendant, not regarding its duty in the premises, by…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion,
Mr. Justice Williams :
The controlling question in this case, is that raised upon the-act of April 4,1868. That act provides that in case an injury is sustained by any person “while lawfully engaged or employed on or about the roads, works, depots and premises of a railroad company, or in or about any train or car therein or thereon, of which company such person is not an employee, the right of action and recovery in all such cases against the-, company shall be such only as would exist if such person were an employee, provided that this section shall not apply to passengers.”
The…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Texas & New Orleans Railroad v. BurdenTexas Supreme Court · 1947
- Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. GaddisTexas Commission of Appeals · 1919
- Grant v. PendleyTexas Commission of Appeals · 1931
- Spisak v. Balt. & Ohio R. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Christman v. Phila. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.