Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Morris
Wyoming Supreme Court
Error to the District Court, Sheridan County, Hon. Carroll H. Parmblb:®, Judge. A. J. Morris brought the action to recover damages for injuries occurring- to certain horses while being- transported by the defendant railroad compan)'-. From a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the-defendant prosecuted error. The facts are stated in the opinion. The car was greatly overcrowded, and this was the shipper’s fault.
Read the full summary
Error to the District Court, Sheridan County, Hon. Carroll H. Parmblb:®, Judge. A. J. Morris brought the action to recover damages for injuries occurring- to certain horses while being- transported by the defendant railroad compan)'-. From a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the-defendant prosecuted error. The facts are stated in the opinion. The car was greatly overcrowded, and this was the shipper’s fault. There is no presumption of negligence as against defendant, because of the mere falling and injuring of the stock, as the mishap is properly to be attributed, under the ■evidence, alone…
1Opinion of the Court
Scott, Justice.
This action was brought in the district court of Sheridan County by the defendant in error as plaintiff against the *312plaintiff in error as defendant to recover damages for injury to horses while in transit over plaintiff in error’s line of railway alleged to have been sustained by reason of the negligence of the company. The case was tried to a jury and a general verdict returned December 13, 1906, in favor of Morris and against the company for the sum of $295, as damages and interest thereon from October 16, 1905. At the same time the jury returned their separate answers to…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. TrawickTexas Supreme Court · 1891
- Michigan Southern & Northern Indiana Railroad v. McDonoughMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. JamesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Mason v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1887
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. HeathIndiana Court of Appeals · 1899
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. LampmanWyoming Supreme Court · 1909
- Iowa State Savings Bank v. HenryWyoming Supreme Court · 1913
- McClanahan v. Woodward Construction Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1957
- Davis v. GrahamWyoming Supreme Court · 1924
- Wood v. Geis Trucking Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1982
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.