Hamme v. CSX Transp., Inc.
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
William Frank Hamme and his wife Sheila appeal from a judgment based on a directed verdict for the defendants, CSX Transportation, Inc., and H.L. Wood, on the Hammes' wantonness claim arising out of a collision involving a CSX train and a truck driven by Frank Hamme.
The Hammes sued CSX and Wood,1 individually and as agent, servant, or employee of CSX, alleging that CSX and Wood had negligently and wantonly caused a collision between the train and Frank Hamme's truck and that in that collision he had suffered injury. Frank Hamme sought "judgment against [CSX and Wood] in [the] sum of…
Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- West v. Founders Life Assur. Co. of FloridaSupreme Court of Alabama · 1989
- Burlington Northern R. Co. v. WhittSupreme Court of Alabama · 1990
- Joseph v. StaggsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1988
- Berry v. FifeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1991
- Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. BrackinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1946
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- prod.liab.rep.(cch)p. 13,892 John Richards, as Conservator, Etc. v. Michelin Tire Corp., the Budd Company Ford Motor Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1994
- Lance, Inc. v. RamanauskasSupreme Court of Alabama · 1999
- Tillman v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2003
- Hicks v. DunnSupreme Court of Alabama · 2001
- Ridgeway v. CSX Transp., Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1998
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.