Madison Coal Corp. v. Stullken
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern Division of the Southern'District of Illinois; Hon. J. Otis Humphrey, Judge. Action at law by George C. Stullken, administrator of the estate of ' Anton Pekar, deceased, against the Madison Coal Corporation. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Plaintiff in error will be hereinafter designated as defendant and defendant in error as plaintiff.
Read the full summary
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern Division of the Southern'District of Illinois; Hon. J. Otis Humphrey, Judge. Action at law by George C. Stullken, administrator of the estate of ' Anton Pekar, deceased, against the Madison Coal Corporation. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Plaintiff in error will be hereinafter designated as defendant and defendant in error as plaintiff. Plaintiff’s intestate, herein termed the decedent, was killed while working in defendant’s coal mine. Suit was instituted by plaintiff, and judgment for $8,000 recovered,…
1Opinion of the CourtKohlsaat, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). [1] The jury having found the defendant guilty of negligence as charged in both of the counts of the declaration, it remains only for-the court to determine from the record whether there was evidence produced sufficient to sustain the verdict. It is not our duty to weigh the evidence. That is for the jury. Express Co. v. Ware, 20 Wall. 545, 22 L. Ed. 422; N. Y. L. E. & W. R. R. Co. v. Estill Leonard, 147 U. S. 617, 13 Sup. Ct. 444, 37 L. Ed. 292; Dower v. Richards, 151 U. S. 658-663, 14 Sup. Ct. 452, 38 L. Ed. 305.
[2] It is clear from the evidence that the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- New York, Lake Erie & Western Railroad v. EstillSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Dower v. RichardsSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Keller v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Express Company v. WareSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
3Cited by1 opinion
- Long Transp. Co. v. DomuratCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1937