Legal Opinion · Dissent

Armstrong v. C. W. I. R. R. Co.

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided October 22, 1932No. 21260. Judgment affirmedPublished

1Dissent

The negligence charged in the first count was that it was the duty of the defendants to furnish Armstrong a reasonably safe place to work in, but they negligently permitted certain unlighted freight cars to be in close and dangerous proximity to the lead or running track on which he was working, and the accident happend as the result. The second count was like the first, except that instead of relying only on the alleged duty of both defendants to furnish a reasonably safe place to work, it alleged that the Chicago and Western Indiana Railroad Company (hereafter called the Indiana Company)…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Great Northern Railway Co. v. WilesSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  2. Chicago City Railway Co. v. GregoryIllinois Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Luthy & Co. v. ParadisIllinois Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Gillis v. New York, New Haven, & Hartford RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
  5. Ingram v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921

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

Powered by the Exa API