Richmond v. Sacramento Valley R.R.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Sixth District. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the Court. Defendants had judgment; plaintiffs appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
Field, C. J. concurring.
This action is for damages sustained by the plaintiffs in consequence of the defendants negligently and carelessly running its locomotive over and killing a cow of plaintiffs’ upon the track of defendant’s railroad. The plaintiffs’ evidence tended to show that the cow was on the track while the cars were going at the rate of twenty or twenty-five miles an hour; that the cars did not decrease their speed when approaching the cow, and that no alarm by the bell or whistle was made.until about the moment of collision; that the cow could have been seen for nearly a half…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Beers v. Housatonuc Rail-roadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1849
- Suydam v. MooreNew York Supreme Court · 1850
- Marsh v. New-York & Erie RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Waldron v. Rensselaer & Saratoga RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1850
- Housatonic Railroad v. WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1854
3Cited by15 opinions
- Nga Li v. Yellow Cab Co.California Supreme Court · 1975
- Nehring v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1912
- Jacobus v. St. Paul & Chicago Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1873
- Fernandes v. Sacramento City Ry.California Supreme Court · 1877
- Solen v. Virginia & Truckee RailroadNevada Supreme Court · 1878
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.