Donley v. D. S. L. R. R. Co.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Donley v. D. S. L. R. R. Co.

141 P.2d 899, 111 Colo. 358, 1943 Colo. LEXIS 251

CourtSupreme Court of Colorado

DecidedSeptember 20, 1943

DocketNo. 15,032.

StatusPublished

This text of 141 P.2d 899 (Donley v. D. S. L. R. R. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Donley v. D. S. L. R. R. Co., 141 P.2d 899, 111 Colo. 358, 1943 Colo. LEXIS 251 (Colo. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

THIS is an action for damages for personal injuries resulting, as it is alleged, from a collision of plaintiff's automobile with a railway train owned and operated by the defendant company. Answering, the company by its fourth defense alleged that plaintiff, under pertinent *Page 359 provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, filed with the Industrial Commission a written election to avail himself of the benefits of said act, and that thereby, "he was forever barred from asserting his alleged cause of action against this defendant." Plaintiff interposed a general demurrer to this defense.

Counsel for the respective parties in their briefs suggest that Wilson v. Smith, of earlier docketing in our court, presented the point here involved, and that our determination thereof would control in this proceeding. That case has now been decided (Wilson v. Smith,110 Colo. 68, 130 P.2d 1053), and on authority of the opinion therein we hold that plaintiff's demurrer in the instant case, which was overruled below, should have been sustained.

That the trial court may make an appropriate order in the premises, the judgment is reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

THIS is an action for damages for personal injuries resulting, as it is alleged, from a collision of plaintiff's automobile with a railway train owned and operated by the defendant company. Answering, the company by its fourth defense alleged that plaintiff, under pertinent *Page 359 provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, filed with the Industrial Commission a written election to avail himself of the benefits of said act, and that thereby, "he was forever barred from asserting his alleged cause of action against this defendant." Plaintiff interposed a general demurrer to this defense.

Counsel for the respective parties in their briefs suggest that Wilson v. Smith, of earlier docketing in our court, presented the point here involved, and that our determination thereof would control in this proceeding. That case has now been decided (Wilson v. Smith,110 Colo. 68, 130 P.2d 1053), and on authority of the opinion therein we hold that plaintiff's demurrer in the instant case, which was overruled below, should have been sustained.

That the trial court may make an appropriate order in the premises, the judgment is reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

141 P.2d 899, 111 Colo. 358, 1943 Colo. LEXIS 251, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donley-v-d-s-l-r-r-co-colo-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack