Osborne v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Vermont
Case for negligence. Plea, the general issue. Trial by jury at the October Term, 1912, Esses County, Fish, J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepted. The opinion states the case.
1Opinion of the CourtWatson, J.
This action is brought upon section 1053 and article 17, section 11, of the Civil Code of the Province of Quebec, to recover for injuries received by the plaintiff when in the employ of the defendant, as conductor on one of defendant’s freight trains, in said Province, by reason of the negligence of the defendant. Section 1053 reads: ‘ ‘ Every person capable of discerning right from wrong is responsible for the damage caused by his fault to another whether by positive act, imprudence, neglect or want of skill.” By article 17, section 11, “the word ‘person’ includes bodies politic and…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Slater v. Mexican National RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Davis v. MillsSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. BabcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Needham v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1865
- Negaubauer v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Midstate Horticultural Co. v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Lough v. State Industrial Accident CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1922
- Anderson v. EvansNebraska Supreme Court · 1957
- Griffin v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1913
- Lilly v. O'BrienCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1928
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.