Cincinnati, Indianapolis, St. Louis & Chicago Railway Co. v. Davis
Indiana Supreme Court
From the Decatur Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtElliott, J.
— The appellee, at the time he was employed to render the professional services which he seeks to recover the value of in this action, was a physician and surgeon, in regular practice at Morris, in this State. He was employed directly by one of the appellant’s conductors, by whom he was informed that a telegram had been received from the appellant’s general superintendent authorizing his employ*100ment, to give professional attention to a man who had been injured by one of the appellant’s trains. The telegram of the superintendent was addressed to the conductor, and reads thus : “ Stop at Morris…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Terre Haute & Indianapolis Railroad v. McMurrayIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Louisville, Evansville & St. Louis Railway Co. v. McVayIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
- Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
- Terre Haute & Indianapolis Railroad v. BrownIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Terre Haute & Indianapolis Railroad v. StockwellIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Parrot v. Mexican Central Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
- Bedford Belt Railway Co. v. McDonaldIndiana Court of Appeals · 1897
- Toledo, St. Louis & Kansas City Railroad v. MylottIndiana Court of Appeals · 1893
- Weinsberg v. St. Louis Cordage Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- Evans v. Marion Mining Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1903
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.