Wormell v. Maine Central Railroad
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On motion to set aside the verdict and exceptions from superior court. The verdict was for four thousand dollars. The facts are fully stated in the opinion. The evidence relating to the custom of sending men out of the shop to do work, elsewhere, was properly admitted. Woods’ Railway Law, Vol. 3, page 1488 ; Ohio & MississippiRy.
Read the full summary
On motion to set aside the verdict and exceptions from superior court. The verdict was for four thousand dollars. The facts are fully stated in the opinion. The evidence relating to the custom of sending men out of the shop to do work, elsewhere, was properly admitted. Woods’ Railway Law, Vol. 3, page 1488 ; Ohio & MississippiRy. Go. v. Oollarn, 73 Ind. 261; Pennsylvania Oo. v. Stoelke, 104111. 201. Whether the plaintiff should have doñeas ordered was a question of fact for the jury, as stated in the charge. Patterson v. P. & O. Ry. Oo. 76 Penn. St. 389; Woods on Master and Servant, p. 760.…
1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.
The plaintiff was at work as a locomotive machinist in the car shops of the defendant corporation at Waterville. On the day the injury was received he was directed by the foreman of the car shops to go out with an engineer and *402move an engine from the paint shop near by to the repair shop where the plaintiff worked. The engine with which the moving was to be done was then standing on the turn-table in the machine shop. In order to move the engine from the paintshop to the repair shop it became necessary first to remove certain cars which were on the track in the yard. The plaintiff went out,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Hayden v. Smithville Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1861
- Railroad Company v. FortSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Leary v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
- Ladd v. New Bedford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- Wheeler v. Wason Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Choctaw, O. & G. R. v. HollowayCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
- Hoffman v. American Foundry Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1897
- Epperson v. Postal Telegraph Cable Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1900
- Russell Creek Coal Co. v. WellsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1898
- Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co. v. O'BrienCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.