Hewitt v. Spokane, Portland & Seattle Railway Co.
Washington Supreme Court
1DissentHill, J.
(dissenting) — The majority opinion is so well written that I hesitate to voice a dissent, but the deftly woven phrases do not conceal the plain hard fact that the plaintiff was injured when the car in which he was riding hit the ninth and tenth cars of a 16-car freight train, then crossing the highway.
The train was not running amok; it was traveling on its own tracks, where it indubitably had a right to be. It also had an unequivocal right of way in crossing the highway; RCW 46.60.320; Morris v. Chicago, Milwaukee St. Paul & Pac. R. Co., 1 Wn.2d 587, 595, 97 P.2d 119 (1939); Haaga v. Saginaw…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Orange & Northwestern Railroad v. HarrisTexas Supreme Court · 1936
- Gilman v. Central Vermont Railway Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1919
- Morris v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadWashington Supreme Court · 1939
- Hendrickson v. Union Pacific RailroadWashington Supreme Court · 1943
- Haaga v. Saginaw Logging Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1932
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.