Kuhnheim v. Pennsylvania Railroad
38 F.2d 1015, 1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 2448
Opinion
When Kuhnheim fell, there had been no occasion for him to set the brake, but only to try it. Except in or after setting, defects in dog or ratchet could not have contributed to such a fall. Nor is it more than a possibility that a chain too long could have so contributed. Even disregarding the eyewitness’ testimony, there can be only surmise that an inefficient brake caused the fall. In this respect, the case is ruled by our decision in Burnett v. Penna. Railroad Co. (C. C. A.) 33 F.(2d) 579.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kuhnheim v. Pennsylvania Railroad, 38 F.2d 1015, 1930 U.S. App. LEXIS 2448 (6th Cir. 1930).
38 F.2d 1015 (Kuhnheim v. Pennsylvania Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Burnett v. Pennsylvania R.
33 F.2d 579 (Sixth Circuit, 1929)