Legal Opinion

Masino v. West Jersey & S. S. R. Co.

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided May 29, 1930No. 4286PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WOOLLEY, Circuit Judge.

At the railroad crossing there was a hell designed to give warning of the approach of a train. There was, of course, a bell on the engine. In this suit for death at tho crossing, the testimony for the plaintiff was that neither bell was ringing; for the defendant, that both were ringing. Being within city limits, the engine whistle was not sounded.

The court charged the jury that it was the duty of the defendant to give adequate warning; that if it gave warning by either bell, that is, oven if the crossing bell, being out of order, was not ringing, yet the engine hell…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. HiltSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  2. Delaware, L. & W. R. v. WelshmanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1915
  3. Hall v. West Jersey & S. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1917
  4. Erie R. v. SchmidtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1915
  5. Swanson v. Central RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1899

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Field v. Fidelity Union Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939
  2. Field v. Fidelity Union Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939
  3. Field v. Fidelity Union Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1939

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API