Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Prunty

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided October 4, 1904No. 1,320Published

In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Louisiana.

1Concurrence

PARDEE, Circuit Judge.

I concur in reinstating the case on the consent of both parties, but I dissent on the merits. On his own showing and under the undisputed facts in the case, Prunty contributed to his own injury. In coupling the engine to the cars there was a safe way and a dangerous way. Of his own motion he selected the dangerous way. Thereby and therein he was injured. The couplers in use were automatic, and he knew that the drawhead on the car was out of alignment and out of order, and he knew, or ought to have known, that from bad weather and repairing then going on the track was…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Morris v. Duluth, S. S. & A. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
  2. Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. MoselySupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
  3. Hurst v. Kansas City, Pittsburg & Gulf RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1901
  4. Dawson v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
  5. George v. Mobile & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of Alabama · 1895

5 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