Legal Opinion

Armstrong v. Butte, Anaconda & Pacific Ry. Co.

Montana Supreme Court

Decided February 19, 1940No. 7,799PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Angstman

Plaintiff has appealed from a judgment in favor of defendant after its motion for nonsuit was sustained. The action is for damages occasioned by the collision of defendant’s train with plaintiff’s automobile, driven by plaintiff at the time of the collision.

The complaint is grounded upon negligence on the part of defendant in running its train over the crossing without ringing a bell or blowing a whistle, and alleges that plaintiff in attempting to negotiate the crossing was proceeding “in a careful and prudent manner,” and “with ordinary diligence and prudence.” The answer may be termed a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Thayer v. Denver & Rio Grande R. R.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Pollard v. Oregon Short Line R.R. Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1932
  3. McCarthy v. Employers' Fire InsuranceMontana Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Manuel v. TurnerMontana Supreme Court · 1908

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Burns v. FisherMontana Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Hannigan v. Northern Pacific Railway CompanyMontana Supreme Court · 1963
  3. Sorrels v. RyanMontana Supreme Court · 1955
  4. State Ex Rel. Barron v. District Court of Thirteenth Judicial District Ex Rel. Stillwater CountyMontana Supreme Court · 1946
  5. Cline v. TaitMontana Supreme Court · 1942

3 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