Legal Opinion

Pullman Co. v. Ward

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided May 18, 1911PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal from Kenton Circuit Court (Common Law and Equity Division).

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Nunn

Affirming.

This is the second appeal of this case. The opinion on the first appeal may be found’ in 138 Ky., 554. On the first trial in the lower court, a peremptory instruction was given in behalf of appellant upon the idea that as the railroad company received the car from the Pullman Company, it was alone responsible to its employes for injuries received by the handling and use of it, as appellant had no contractual relation with appellee, it was not responsible to him. This court took a different view of the matter and said that as the Pullman Company had…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Logan v. Cin., N. O. & T. P. Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1910
  2. Ward v. Pullman Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1910
  3. Mastin v. LevagoodSupreme Court of Kansas · 1891

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Olds Motor Works v. ShafferCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911
  2. Foster v. Ford Motor CompanyWashington Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Pullman Co. v. Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific RailroadCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1912
  4. Burkett v. Studebaker Bros. Manufacturing Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Osheroff v. Rhodes-Burford Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1924

3 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