Davis v. Hareford
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, J., (after stating the facts).
It is first earnestly insisted that the evidence is not legally sufficient to warrant the verdict. In this contention we cannot agree with counsel for appellant. The undisputed evidence shows that the injuries sustained by appellee were caused by the engine of one of appellant’s passenger trains striking an automobile in which appellee and other members of his family were riding. The accident happened while they were attempting to cross the railroad track of appellant at a public road crossing. Under our statute this proof was sufficient to make out a prima…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Barringer v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Patterson v. RisherSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
- St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co. v. WhitfieldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
- Arkansas Central Railway Co. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. ArmbrustSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
3Cited by10 opinions
- Coca Cola Bottling Co. v. ShippSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Mississippi River Fuel Corp. v. SennSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- Cutchins v. Seaboard Air Line Railroad CompanySupreme Court of Florida · 1958
- Kansas City Southern Railway Company v. CockrellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. ThomasSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.