Legal Opinion
Hutson v. Southern California Ry. Co.
California Supreme Court
Decided March 25, 1907No. L.A. No. 1491PublishedCited by 39 opinions
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. L. J. Norton, E. W. Camp, Paul Burks, and E. E. Milliken, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
When this case was in Department, in the opinion there rendered it was said:—
“This is an action for damages, wherein plaintiffs charge that, by the negligent operation of defendant’s train, they were struck by it while crossing the track of defendant, and sustained the injuries for which the damages were sought. Plaintiffs were riding in a heavy wood-wagon drawn by two horses, and were approaching the crossing at which there were two tracks, the tracks of the Terminal railway and the tracks of the defendant’s railway. They had passed over the track of the Terminal road and their…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Railroad Company v. HoustonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Herbert v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
- Murphy v. WaterhouseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Pepper v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1895
- Bilton v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1906
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Zibbell v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
- White v. DavisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Slaughter v. Goldberg, Bowen & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1915
- Moss v. H. R. Boynton Co.California Court of Appeal · 1919
- Koster v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1929
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.