Montgomery v. Colorado Springs & Interurban Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Colorado
Error to El Paso District Cowi — -Hon. William P. Seeds, Judge.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Garrigues
1. By Instruction 10, the court in effect told the jury that if the negligence of both contributed to the injury, plaintiff could not recover, unless the conductor, after he became aware of her danger, was guilty of conduct showing a willful intention to injure her, and the defendant might, by the exercise of ordinary care, have avoided the accident. There was no theory of the case, or evidence, calling for this instruction. Plaintiff testified the car was put in motion while she was alighting.- Defendant’s theory was, that she kept her seat until • the car started, when she attempted to get…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Washington & Georgetown Railroad v. Harmon's AdministratorSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Nichols v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Colorado · 1908
- Behen v. St. Louis Transit Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- Denver & Berkeley Park Rapid Transit Co. v. DwyerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1894
- Birmingham Union Railway Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Arps v. City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1927
- Catlett v. Colorado & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1914
- American Mortgage Co. v. LoganSupreme Court of Colorado · 1932
- Barr v. Colorado Springs & Interurban Railway Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1917
- Arps v. City & County of DenverSupreme Court of Colorado · 1927
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.