American Negligence Reports, Current Series: (cited Am. Neg. Rep.) All the Current Negligence Cases Decided in the Federal Courts of the United States, the Courts of Last Resort of All the States and Territories, and Selections from the Intermediate Courts, Together with Notes of English Cases and Annotations, Volume 20John Milton Gardner, Walter James Eagle Remick & Schilling, 1907 - Employers' liability "All the current negligence cases decided in the federal courts of the United States, the courts of last resort of all the states and territories, and selections from the intermediate courts, together with notes of English cases and annotations." (varies) |
Contents
| xxxvi | |
| xl | |
| xlv | |
| xlix | |
| 12 | |
| 36 | |
| 41 | |
| 46 | |
| 326 | |
| 329 | |
| 337 | |
| 338 | |
| 342 | |
| 346 | |
| 349 | |
| 364 | |
| 53 | |
| 75 | |
| 95 | |
| 101 | |
| 107 | |
| 114 | |
| 150 | |
| 158 | |
| 159 | |
| 180 | |
| 195 | |
| 196 | |
| 203 | |
| 209 | |
| 218 | |
| 224 | |
| 233 | |
| 237 | |
| 258 | |
| 270 | |
| 275 | |
| 288 | |
| 315 | |
| 322 | |
| 373 | |
| 408 | |
| 423 | |
| 430 | |
| 432 | |
| 433 | |
| 438 | |
| 439 | |
| 449 | |
| 458 | |
| 488 | |
| 503 | |
| 516 | |
| 523 | |
| 625 | |
| 631 | |
| 660 | |
| 667 | |
| 671 | |
| 700 | |
| 713 | |
| 767 | |
| 784 | |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
accident action alleged appellant appellee appliances assumed the risk bill of lading caboose carrier caused charge Chicago coal common carrier common law condition conductor consignee contract contributory negligence corporation danger defect defendant in error defendant's directed verdict driver duty employees engine evidence exercise fact failure feet fell fellow-servant foreman freight gence guilty held horse instruction intestate judgment for plaintiff jury knowledge liable machine Mass master Minn motion municipal municipal corporation N. E. Rep N. J. Law nonsuit operation opinion ordinary owner passenger personal injuries plaintiff in error plaintiff was affirmed premises proper question R'y Co rail railroad company Railway Company reason res ipsa loquitur reversed rule safe safety servant shaft sheep sidewalk statute street struck supra Supreme Court sustained testified testimony ticket tion track train trial court trolley pole verdict wagon wire witness
Popular passages
Page 458 - That must always rest upon some difference which bears a reasonable and just relation to the act in respect to which the classification is proposed, and can never be made arbitrarily and without any such basis.
Page 733 - The court said there must be reasonable evidence of negligence; but where the thing is .shown to be under the management of the defendant or his servants, and the accident is such as, in the ordinary course of things, does not happen if those who have the management use proper care, it affords reasonable evidence, in the absence of explanation by the defendant, that the accident arose from want of care.
Page 455 - Kansas of 1874 providing that "every railroad company organized or doing business in this state shall be liable for all damages done to any employee of such company in consequence of any negligence of its agents, or by any mismanagement of its engineers or other employees to any person sustaining such damage...
Page 471 - Without, therefore, considering the merits of this cause, the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded for such further proceedings as may be consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered.
Page 15 - To sue and be sued in all courts and places and in all actions and proceedings whatever...
Page 146 - ... the shipper to be paid a large value for an article which he has induced the carrier to take at a low rate of freight on the assertion and agreement that its value is a less sum than that claimed after a loss. It is just to hold the shipper to his agreement, fairly made, as to value, even where the loss or injury has occurred through the negligence of the carrier. The effect of the agreement is to cheapen the freight and secure the carriage, if there is no loss; and the effect of disregarding...
Page 294 - ... was in the exercise of ordinary care for his own safety at the time of the accident.
Page 518 - Melrose, a locomotive engineer, to recover damages for personal injuries received by him while in the employ of the appellant. The accident, in which appellee was injured, occurred on April 25, 1902.
Page 24 - One is bound to anticipate and provide against what usually happens and what is likely to happen ; but it would impose too heavy a responsibility to hold him bound in like manner to guard against what is unusual and unlikely to happen, or what, as it is sometimes said, is only remotely and slightly probable.
Page 190 - J., observed that in order for it to apply "there must be reasonable evidence of negligence, but where the thing is shown to be under the management of the defendant or his servants, and the accident is such as in the ordinary course of things does not happen, if those who have the management use proper care, it affords reasonable evidence, in the absence of explanation by the defendants, that the accident arose from want of care.