Legal Opinion

Oregon-Washington R. & Nav. Co. v. Roman

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 3, 1923No. 4049PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtHunt, Circuit Judge

(after stating the facts as above). The principal assignments of error go to the refusal of the court to sustain the motion for a directed verdict. But we are of opinion that the court was right in submitting the issues to the jury. While the hooks contain cases wherein, under the particular facts presented, the courts have held that children crossing railroad tracks may be guilty of *668contributory negligence, nevertheless there are certain general principles now so well ingrafted upon the law of negligence that mere statement of them will demonstrate their applicability to the facts…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Taylor v. Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1886
  2. Baltimore & Potomac Railroad v. CumberlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
  3. Steele v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Roth v. Union Depot Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Lovell v. House of the Good ShepherdWashington Supreme Court · 1896

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Grabenc v. Union Pac. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API