Rheingans v. New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 78, Jan. T., 1912, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Erie Co., Nov. T., 1909, No. 98, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Lena Eose Eheingans v. The New York, Chicago & St. Louis Eailroad Company. Trespass to recover damages for death of plaintiff’s husband. Before Bouton, P. J., specially presiding. The circumstances of the accident are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $,5,000. Defendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 78, Jan. T., 1912, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Erie Co., Nov. T., 1909, No. 98, on verdict for plaintiff in case of Lena Eose Eheingans v. The New York, Chicago & St. Louis Eailroad Company. Trespass to recover damages for death of plaintiff’s husband. Before Bouton, P. J., specially presiding. The circumstances of the accident are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $,5,000. Defendant appealed. Error assigned was refusal of binding instructions for defendant.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,
The plaintiff’s husband was a conductor in the service of the Bessemer & Lake Erie Eailroad Company. He was run over and killed by the tender of an engine of the New, York, Chicago & St. Louis Eailroad Company, at a place where both companies used the same track and maintained a telegraph office for their joint use. In the performance of his duty, he was crossing the tracks at night, with a lantern in his hand, from the *478telegraph office to his train, when he was struck by the tender, that was running backwards, at the rate of five or six miles an hour. He was familiar with the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Schmidt v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1914
- Hastings v. South Shore RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Nadazny v. Philadelphia & Reading Railway Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Marks v. SwayneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997