Legal Opinion

Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. Plummer

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

Decided April 12, 1911PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal from Lewis Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Carroll

Affirming.

While the appellee Plummer was engaged in placing tan bark in a car of the appellant company, which was standing on the “house track” at Yanceburg, the car in which he was working was struck by a moving car— the result being that he was thrown down and severely injured. To recover damages for the injuries thus sustained, he brought this action, and upon a trial the jury gave him $1,500.00. A reversal is asked, first: Because the court refused to direct a verdict for the appellant, and second: for error in giving and refusing instructions.

The facts…

2Cited by10 opinions

  1. Missouri, O. & G. Ry. Co. v. CollinsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  2. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. MattinglyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1958
  3. Louisville N. R. Co. v. HallCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1938
  4. St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. ColeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  5. Seaboard Air-Line Railway v. BakerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916

5 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