Ruffner v. Cincinnati, Hamilton, & Dayton Railroad
Ohio Supreme Court
Motion for leave to file a petition in error to the District Court of Hamilton county. The original action -was brought by plaintiff in error, against defendant in error, for injury to plaintiff’s cattle from a passing train on defendant’s road.
Read the full summary
Motion for leave to file a petition in error to the District Court of Hamilton county. The original action -was brought by plaintiff in error, against defendant in error, for injury to plaintiff’s cattle from a passing train on defendant’s road. Shortly before the alleged injury, dry grass in or near the line of defendant’s road was ignited by a spark from a passing locomotive, and the fire was communicated to, and destroyed a. fence inclosing the field where the plaintiff’s cattle were in pasture, whereby the cattle wandered upon the defendant’s track and were injured by a subsequent train,…
1Opinion of the CourtMcIlvaine, J.
The sole question submitted to me for report is this: Does an inference of negligence arise from, the mere fact that an injury results from a fire caused by' sparks from a passing locomotive, in the use of a chartered railroad company, which is authorized by law to propel its-trains and operate its road by the use of -steam locomotives ?
This question must be answered in the negative. The-emission of sparks from such locomotives results from the-mere use, and is as natural as it is common ; therefore, it-can not be presumed, either as matter of law or matter of fact, that the escape of sparks…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Sheldon v. . the Hudson River Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
- Baltimore & Susquehanna Rail Road v. WoodruffCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1853
- Rood v. New-York & Erie RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1854
- Burroughs v. Housatonic RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1842
- Mitchell v. WellsMississippi Supreme Court · 1859