O'Shields v. Georgia Pacific Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Georgia
Practice. Amendment. Actions. Torts. Limitations. Before Judge Marshall J. Clarke. Pulton superior court. September term, 1889. Reported in the decision.
1Opinion of the Court
Bleckley, Chief Justice.
The plaintiff was an employé of the defendant as a *622ear-coupler. "While on duty in the State of Alabama, he received a personal injury, in consequence partly of the negligence of the engineer and conductor, his coemployés, and partly in consequence of the defective condition of a certain part of one of the cars called a drawhead. As the original declaration stood, it would seem that the defective drawhead was referred to, not as an independent cause of„action, but as a circumstance relied upon to charge the engineer and conductor with a higher degree of diligence on…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- The HarrisburgSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Eastwood v. KennedyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1876
- Kimbro & Morgan v. Virginia & Tennessee Air-Line Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1876
3Cited by32 opinions
- Jones v. BalesDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1972
- Baron Tube Company, the Partnership of Hyman Baron and Jay Baron and Hyman Baron, Individually v. The Transport Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
- Theroux v. Northern Pac. R.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1894
- Brunswick Terminal Co. v. National Bank of BaltimoreCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1900
- Taylor v. MurraySupreme Court of Georgia · 1974
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.