Legal Opinion

Norfolk & W. Ry. Co. v. Collingsworth

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided May 10, 1929No. 5152PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HICKS, Circuit Judge.

Collingsworth, a switch oiler, while engaged as ■ such, at about 7:30 p. m., October 15, 1926, in the ■yards of appellant, was run down and injured by the front of a cut of 11 or 12 box ears being shoved by an engine moving backwardly. He brought this suit to recover for the damages inflicted. Appellant’s motion for a directed verdict was denied and the court, clarifying the averments of the petition, submitted the ease to the jury upon two allegations of negligence: First, that “the train was moving ■ eastwardly without having a watchman or lookout on the leading car,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Toledo, St. Louis & Western Railroad v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
  2. A. B. Small Co. v. Lamborn & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1925
  3. Boldt v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  4. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad v. KoskeSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  5. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. NixonSupreme Court of the United States · 1926

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Sinram v. Pennsylvania R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
  2. Martin v. Wabash Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1930
  3. Tiller v. Atlantic Coast Line R.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1942
  4. Kurn v. StanfieldCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1940
  5. Finley v. St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1942

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API