Legal Opinion

Lemasters v. Southern Pacific Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided December 24, 1900No. L.A. No. 791PublishedCited by 38 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.

This action was brought by the father to recover damages for the death of his son. The deceased was a bright, active boy, nearly seventeen years of age. He was a fireman upon a switch-engine of defendant, and had been working in that capacity for nearly two months. At the time of the accident he was not on duty. The pay-car of defendant, to which was attached a switch-engine, started to go from the railroad station to the roundhouse. A board is attached re spactively to the front and rear of this engine, about a foot above the track. This board is placed there for the use of the yardmen in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Eaton v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
  2. Esrey v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Wilcox v. San Antonio & Aransas Pass Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1895

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Buckley v. ChadwickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  2. State ex rel. Biggs v. CorleySupreme Court of Delaware · 1934
  3. Keena v. United RailRoads of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
  4. Tognazzini v. FreemanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
  5. Lucas v. WalkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1913

33 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