The American and English Railroad Cases: A Collection of All Cases in the Courts of Last Resort in America and England [1879?-1895].
Lawrence Lewis, Adelbert Hamilton, John Houston Merrill, William Mark McKinney, James Manford Kerr, John Crawford Thomson
Edward Thompson Company, 1881
Covers cases decided [1879?]-1895.
Mitä ihmiset sanovat - Kirjoita arvostelu
Yhtään arvostelua ei löytynyt.
Muita painoksia - Näytä kaikki
accident action agent alleged amount appears appellant applied approaching authority bonds Boston cars cause Central charge Chicago claimed compensation complainants condition Constitution construction contract corporation court crossing damages danger deceased defect defendant defendant's determine direct duty effect employed engine entitled error evidence exercise existence express fact further give given granted ground held injury instruction interest issue judgment jury land legislature liable manner Mass master means mortgage motion necessary negligence notice obligation operating opinion ordinary owner paid party passed passenger payment performance person plaintiff present principal proper question R. R. Co railroad company railway company reason received recover reference refused regard Reports respect result road rule running servant Smith statute street sufficient taken tion town track train trial verdict
Sivu 591 - No county, city, town or village shall hereafter give any money or property, or loan its money or credit to or in aid of any individual, association or corporation, or become directly or indirectly the owner of stock in, or bonds of, any association or corporation ; nor shall any such county, city, town or village be allowed to incur any indebtedness except for county, city, town or village purposes.
Sivu 599 - Gray, 84, is applicable, that if the different parts 'are so mutually connected with and dependent on each other, as conditions, considerations or compensations for each other, as to warrant a belief that the legislature intended them as a whole, and that, if all could not be carried into effect, the legislature would not pass the residue independently, and some parts are unconstitutional, all the provisions which are thus dependent, conditional or connected, must fall with them.* Or, as the point...
Sivu 144 - No variance between the allegation in a pleading and the proof is to be deemed material, unless it has actually misled the adverse party to his prejudice in maintaining his action or defense upon the merits.
Sivu 95 - The general rule, resulting from considerations as well of justice as of policy, is, that he who engages in the employment of another for the performance of specified duties and services, for compensation, takes upon himself the natural and ordinary risks and perils incident to the performance of such services, and in legal presumption, the compensation is adjusted accordingly.
Sivu 622 - ... no such company shall make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to or in favour of any particular person or company, or any particular description of traffic, in any respect whatsoever...
Sivu 294 - No law shall be passed by the general assembly granting the right to construct and operate a street railroad within any city, town or incorporated village, without requiring the consent of the local authorities having the control of the street or highway proposed to be occupied by such street railroad.
Sivu 445 - No corporation shall be created by special laws, or its charter extended, changed or amended, except those for charitable, educational, penal or reformatory purposes, which are to be and remain under the patronage and control of the state, but the general assembly shall provide, by general laws, for the organization of all corporations hereafter to be created.
Sivu 507 - States nearest to the tiers of sections above specified, so much land in alternate sections or parts of sections, designated by odd numbers, as shall be equal to such lands as the United States have sold, reserved, or otherwise appropriated...
Sivu 39 - ... in every case, before the evidence is left to the jury, there is a preliminary question for the judge, not whether there Is literally no evidence, but whether there Is any upon which a jury can properly proceed to find a verdict for the party producing it, upon whom the onus of proof is imposed.