Legal Opinion

Manchester Marble Co. v. Rutland Railroad

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided February 26, 1927PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFish, J.

This is an action brought under G-. L. 5256 with a count in negligence. The defendant answered in general denial and set up the affirmative defense that the plaintiff, by written agreement, had assumed all risk of loss by fire to the property destroyed, and had released the defendant from all claims for such loss and agreed to indemnify and save it harmless.

The plaintiff claimed damages for destruction by fire of its marble mill and property, situated alongside the main line of the defendant railroad in the hamlet of Freedleyville in the town of Dorset in Bennington County, which it claimed…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Hartford Fire Insurance v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1899
  2. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. W. T. Carter & BrotherTexas Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Checkley v. Illinois Central RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Griswold v. Illinois Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1894
  5. McAllister v. BenjaminSupreme Court of Vermont · 1923

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Hazel B. McTighe v. New England Telephone and Telegraph CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1954
  2. M. D. Smith D/B/A M. D. Smith Construction Company v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
  3. Pettit Grain & Potato Co. v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
  4. deNEERGAARD v. DillinghamSupreme Court of Vermont · 1963
  5. Fairchild Square Co. v. Green Mountain Bagel Bakery, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1995

10 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