Kearney v. Central Railroad

31 A. 637, 167 Pa. 362, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 912
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedApril 8, 1895
DocketAppeal, No. 229
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 31 A. 637 (Kearney v. Central Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kearney v. Central Railroad, 31 A. 637, 167 Pa. 362, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 912 (Pa. 1895).

Opinion

Per Curiam,

It is very clear that the injury complained of by plaintiff did not result from the operation of the road by the defendant who was merely the lessee thereof. If he sustained any actionable injury it must have resulted from the construction of the bridge, etc., and not from the operation of the railroad merely. The [364]*364bridge was not built by defendant company, but by another railroad company. The learned trial judge rightly held that there could be no recovery against the defendant.

There is nothing in either of the specifications that calls for discussion. They are all dismissed and the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Marshall v. Wichita & Midland Valley Railroad
152 P. 634 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1915)
City of New Orleans v. Louisiana Savings Bank & Safe Deposit Co.
31 La. 826 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1879)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
31 A. 637, 167 Pa. 362, 1895 Pa. LEXIS 912, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kearney-v-central-railroad-pa-1895.