Legal Opinion

Devaney v. Omaha & Council Bluffs Street Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided November 22, 1918PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from Pottawattamie District Court. — Thomas " Arthur, Judge. The plaintiff has verdict and judgment for an injury to his person and his property which he alleges was due to the negligence of the defendant. Defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtSalinger, J.

1. Negligence: failure to meet burden. I. If there may be said to be a conflict on whether plaintiff was warned, by gong or otherwise, of the approach of defendant’s car, it is not material on the question whether plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, because it is admit- ^ that plaintiff saw the car coming when it was still 300 feet away, on the north track, and while he was next to the south track, and had not begun to go. across, — at all events, when his horse was not yet upon the track. There is a conflict on the speed at which the car was coming, but it, too, is not material…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sanderson v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1914
  2. Lundien v. Fort Dodge, Des Moines & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1914
  3. McCormick v. Ottumwa Railway & Light Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1910
  4. Sandell v. Des Moines City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1918
  5. Duggan v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1916

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Murphy v. Iowa Electric Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1928

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

Powered by the Exa API