Legal Opinion

Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Pitchford

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided February 28, 1914No. 3044Published

Error from District Court, Ee Flore County -; Action by Jane Ritchford against the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.

1Opinion

On Rehearing.

Opinion by

SHARP, C.

It is urged in the petition for rehearing, filed by counsel for plaintiff in error, that the original opinion failed to pass upon the objection that instructions numbered 4 and 5 misdirected the jury, in that no reference to the question of contributory negligence, qualifying plaintiff’s right of recovery, was submitted to the jury. Counsel’s position is correct. Under the condition of the record, the defense of contributory negligence was made an issue. There was sufficient evidence to have sent this question to the jury. Plaintiff’s signed statement of how…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. BaroniSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  2. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. RadfordSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
  3. Kenan v. HollowaySupreme Court of Alabama · 1849
  4. Cole v. SearfossIndiana Court of Appeals · 1912
  5. First Nat. Bank of Muskogee v. TevisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911

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

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

Powered by the Exa API