Legal Opinion

Dong Chong v. Honolulu Rapid Transit & Land Co.

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided November 28, 1904PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Exceptions prom Circuit Court, First Circuit.

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT BY

FREAR, C.J.

This is an action for $123.15 damages caused to plaintiff’s mule, wagon and harness by a collision with one of defendant’s electric street cars. The district magistrate, who first tried the-case, ordered a nonsuit, and at the trial before a jury on appeal, the circuit judge also, at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence,, ordered a nonsuit, on the ground that the plaintiff had failed to-show negligence on the part of the defendant — the latter’s motion for such nonsuit having been made on that ground and the additional ground that the evidence showed…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Stafford v. Chippewa Valley Electric RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
  2. Flaherty v. HarrisonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Benjamin v. Holyoke Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1893
  4. Redford v. Spokane Street Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Laethem v. Fort Wayne & Belle Isle Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1894

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd'sMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2003
  2. Young v. Honolulu Construction & Draying Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Ferrage v. Honolulu Rapid Transit & Land Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Robinson v. Honolulu Rapid Transit & Land Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1911
  5. Borowsky v. Honolulu Rapid Transit Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1926

1 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