Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co. v. Saulsberry
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 109 — Action to Recover Damages for Personal Injuries.— appeal from carter circuit court. Judgment for Plaintiff and Defendant Appeals.
Read the full summary
Case 109 — Action to Recover Damages for Personal Injuries.— appeal from carter circuit court. Judgment for Plaintiff and Defendant Appeals. PROPOSITIONS AND CITATIONS. 1. Defendant had the right and it was its duty, in view ÓT the plaintiif’s conduct, to put him off the train at Aden: Kentucky Statutes, sec., 806; L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Logan, 88 Ky., 232, 239-41; Smith v. L. & N. R. R. Co., 95 Id., 14-15. 2. The plaintiff having been properly ejected, and the acci-. dent having been caused by his own wrongful act in attempting to get back upon the moving train, even if the defendant was…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion op the coubt by
JUDGE BURNAM —
Reversing.
The plaintiff, a minor, by his next friend, alleged “that on the 14th day of October, 189S, the defendant company ran a passenger excursion train from Morehead, Kentucky, to Huntington, West Virginia, and return, at one fare for a round-trip ticket, oin account of the show given in Huntington by Buffalo Bill; that he boarded the train at Aden station with a number of other parties, among whom were the defendants, Walter Littleton and Walter James; that upon the return of the train it reached .Aden about 8:20 p. m., after dark, and that he was so…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Forbes & Bro. v. Cooper & Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1889
- Smith v. Louisville & Nashville RailroadCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1893
- Lou. & Nash. R. R. v. LoganCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1889
- Reed v. L. & N. R. R.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1898
3Cited by1 opinion
- Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co. v. CrankCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1908