Russell v. Hudson River Railroad
The Superior Court of New York City
Case upon a verdict for the plaintiff for $225, subject to the opinion of the court, on a case to be made to be heard in the first instance at General Term, with liberty to either party to turn the same into a bill of exceptions, or case containing exceptions, and •with liberty to the court at General Term to dismiss the complaint, if of the opinion that no action would lie on the facts proved.
Read the full summary
Case upon a verdict for the plaintiff for $225, subject to the opinion of the court, on a case to be made to be heard in the first instance at General Term, with liberty to either party to turn the same into a bill of exceptions, or case containing exceptions, and •with liberty to the court at General Term to dismiss the complaint, if of the opinion that no action would lie on the facts proved. The action was, to recover damages for injuries sustained by the plaintiff from being thrown between two cars, in consequence of the train being precipitated into Spuytendevil Creek. The complaint…
1Opinion of the CourtBy the Court. Duer, J.
It cannot he denied that the decision of the Court of Appeals in the case of Coon v. the Syracuse and Utica R. R. Co., (1 Selden, p. 492,) has established the law that a servant or agent cannot maintain an action against his employer for injuries sustained by him, through the negligence of another servant or agent engaged with him in the same common employment, and if this rule were applicable to the present case, it would be our plain duty to dismiss the complaint. But we are clearly of opinion that the rule is not applicable, since, as we understand the facts of the case, the plaintiff was…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Ewald v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
- State ex rel. Abell v. Western Maryland RailroadCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1885
- Columbus & Toledo Railroad v. O'BrienOhio Circuit Courts · 1890
- Columbus & Toledo Ry. Co. v. O'BrienSeneca Circuit Court · 1890