Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Seymoure v. Director General of Railroads

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided June 4, 1923No. 3912Published

1ConcurrenceSmyth, Chief Justice

Doubting that the act complained of came within the scope of Regan’s specific authority, I prefer to place my concurrence in the judgment of reversal upon the broad ground that Seymoure was a passenger, and as such entitled to protection from the railroad company against assaults by its employees (Hayne v. Union Street Railway Co., 189 Mass. 551, 76 N. E. 219, 3 L. R. A. (N. S.) 605, 109 Am. St. Rep. 655; Pendleton v. Kinsley, 3 Cliff. 416, Fed. Cas. No. 10922; Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Willsie, 224 Fed. 908, 140 C. C. A. 352; New Jersey Steam-Boat Co. v. Brockett, 121 U. S. 637, 7…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. New Jersey Steamboat Co. v. BrockettSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  2. Hayne v. Union Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
  3. Pendleton v. KinsleyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1871
  4. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. WillsieCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1915

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

Powered by the Exa API