Legal Opinion

Clark v. Northern Pacific Railroad

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 25, 1891PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Grow Wing county, Holland, J., presiding, refusing a new trial after a dismissal ordered at the trial, in an action to recover $15,000 for personal injuries.

1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, J.

The dismissal of the action on the case presented on the part of the plaintiff was justified for the reason that, by his own showing, he was chargeable with contributory negligence. The injury complained of was caused by his being struck by a snow-plough followed by a locomotive running south, as he was crossing the railroad track at a place which may be deemed to have been recognized by the defendant as a licensed crossing place over its road, and where, as may be assumed, the company was bound to exercise care to avoid injury to those who might travel there. It may be assumed that the…

2Cited by13 opinions

  1. Louisville & Nashville R. R. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
  2. Baker v. Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
  3. White v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Schneider v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
  5. Testo v. Oregon-Washington Railroad & Navigation Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1921

8 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