Chicago Junction Ry. Co. v. King
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. Defendant in error as plaintiff below recovered judgment for damages on account of personal injuries. The two counts on which the case was submitted to the jury were based on an alleged violation of the safety appliance acts. Act March 2, 1893, c. 196, 27 Stat. 531 (U. S. Comp.
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. Defendant in error as plaintiff below recovered judgment for damages on account of personal injuries. The two counts on which the case was submitted to the jury were based on an alleged violation of the safety appliance acts. Act March 2, 1893, c. 196, 27 Stat. 531 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3174); Act April 1, 1896, c. 87, 29 Stat. 85; Act March 2, 1903, c. 976, 32 Stat. 943 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907, p. 885). In one count it was alleged that the defendant, an interstate…
1Opinion of the CourtBaker, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). In Wabash R. Co. v. U. S. and Elgin, etc., R. Co. v. U. S. (herewith decided) 168 Fed. 1, we have expressed our judgment that the safety appliance acts are constitutional
Was the car movement in question unlawful? From the acts of plaintiff and of the car repairer, Tony, in bringing new parts to the place- where the defective car stood, the jury were justified in finding that it was reasonably practicable to make the repairs without *377moving the car. Corrigan decided in favor of pushing the car to-the place of supplies because he thought that there the repairs…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. RossSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburg Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. VoelkerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Monmouth Mining & Manufacturing Co. v. ErlingIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Prickett v. Sulzberger & Sons Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Johnson v. United Railways Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1912
- Johnson v. Great Northern Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1910
- Erie R. v. RussellCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1910
- Southern Ry. Co. v. SnyderCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1911
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.