Needham v. San Francisco & San José R.R.
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the District Court, Third Judicial District, Santa Clara County. The defendant appealed. The other facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Sanderson, J.:
This is an action to recover the value of a mare which is alleged to have become valueless by reason of certain injuries sustained by her while trespassing ujb.on the defendant’s road, through gross negligence of the defendant’s servants while removing her. The plaintiff recovered a verdict in the Court below, and the defendant applied for a new trial upon the grounds: first, that the verdict was contrary to the evidence; and second, that the Court erred in its charge to the jury.
The plaintiff alleges that the defendant had failed to fence its road, and for that…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Tonawanda Rail-Road v. MungerNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Isbell v. New York & New Haven RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1858
- Trow v. Vermont Central RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1852
- Wilds v. . the Hudson River Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- Gay v. WinterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
3Cited by44 opinions
- Nga Li v. Yellow Cab Co.California Supreme Court · 1975
- Brandelius v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Harrington v. Los Angeles Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
- Washington v. B. & O. R. R.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1880
- Ewing v. Cloverleaf BowlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.