Legal Opinion

Richardson v. Augusta & Aiken Ry. Co.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided April 8, 1908No. 6848PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Before Hydrick, J. Aiken, Action by W. S. Richardson and Mrs. M. A. Richardson against Augusta and Aiken Railway Company. From judgment for plaintiff defendant appeals. Mr. Sally cites: 27 S. C., 268; 35 S. C., 384; 46 S. C., -203; 56 S. C., 205; 77 S, C., 374; 8 R. R. A., 299; 3 Id., 368; 74 la., 732; 18 R. R. A., 599; 4 A,-S. R., 374; 48 A. R., 74; 60 A. R., 413; 97 A. D., 478; 6 Cyc., 611. Messrs.

Read the full summary

Before Hydrick, J. Aiken, Action by W. S. Richardson and Mrs. M. A. Richardson against Augusta and Aiken Railway Company. From judgment for plaintiff defendant appeals. Mr. Sally cites: 27 S. C., 268; 35 S. C., 384; 46 S. C., -203; 56 S. C., 205; 77 S, C., 374; 8 R. R. A., 299; 3 Id., 368; 74 la., 732; 18 R. R. A., 599; 4 A,-S. R., 374; 48 A. R., 74; 60 A. R., 413; 97 A. D., 478; 6 Cyc., 611. Messrs. Davis, Gunter and Gyles cite: 27 S. C., 268; 35 S. C., 384; 46 S. C., 219; 53 S. C., 206; 5 Ency., 579.

1Opinion of the Court

April 8, 1908. The opinion of the Court was delivered by The plaintiffs, W.S. Richardson and Mrs. M.A. Richardson, are husband and wife, and the former is made a formal party. Mrs. Richardson insists in her complaint that she was injured while making an effort to board the train of the defendant and sues for ten thousand dollar damages for such alleged injuries.

The defendant denies that she was injured, as alleged by her, but says that if she was so injured it was on account of her contributory negligence.

The action came on to be heard before Judge Hydrick and a jury; both sides introduced…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Southern RailwaySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1898
  2. Riddle v. ReeseSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1898
  3. Madden v. Port Royal &c. Railway Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1892
  4. Simms v. South Carolina Railway Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1887
  5. McAdams v. RobinsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1892

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Southern Pacific Co. v. BuntinArizona Supreme Court · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API