Legal Opinion

Denver Tramway Co. v. Nesbit

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided April 15, 1896PublishedCited by 20 opinions

Appeal from, the District Court of Arapahoe County. Action to recover damages for personal injuries caused by defendant’s negligence. On September 24, 1890, the plaintiff, William J. Nesbit, was employed by The Denver Tramway Company in the capacity of conductor on its street cars. On October 17, 1890, in the morning, he took charge of a train consisting of a motor and trail car, and was engaged in operating the same upon the company’s Lawrence street line.

Read the full summary

Appeal from, the District Court of Arapahoe County. Action to recover damages for personal injuries caused by defendant’s negligence. On September 24, 1890, the plaintiff, William J. Nesbit, was employed by The Denver Tramway Company in the capacity of conductor on its street cars. On October 17, 1890, in the morning, he took charge of a train consisting of a motor and trail car, and was engaged in operating the same upon the company’s Lawrence street line. On the third trip, while the train was going at a speed of from twelve to fourteen miles an hour, in attempting to pass from the motor to…

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Goddard

From the undisputed facts in this case it appears that the appellee was engaged as conductor in operating a train of cars on appellant’s street railway, and while the train was in rapid motion attempted to step from the rear of the motor to the trail car, and, by reason of the sudden bobbing up of the motor at the time, missed the hand rail on the trailer and fell in such a way as to bring his foot and ankle under the rear wheel of the trailer. There was no fender or life guard on the trailer, and the company, at the time, was using trail cars both with and without the guard, and its absence…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Sullivan v. India Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
  2. Sweeney v. . Berlin and Jones Envelope Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
  3. Jenney Electric Light & Power Co. v. MurphyIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
  4. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern R. W. Co. v. McCormickIndiana Supreme Court · 1880
  5. Ladd v. New Bedford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Yost v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1912
  2. Monarch Mining & Development Co. v. DeVoeSupreme Court of Colorado · 1906
  3. Elkton Consolidated Mining & Milling Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1907
  4. Last Chance Mining & Milling Co. v. AmesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1896
  5. Denver & Rio Grande Railroad v. BurchardSupreme Court of Colorado · 1906

15 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