Mills v. Orange, Alexandria & Manassas Railroad

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Mills v. Orange, Alexandria & Manassas Railroad

9 D.C. 314

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 15, 1875

DocketNo. 9637

StatusPublished

This text of 9 D.C. 314 (Mills v. Orange, Alexandria & Manassas Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mills v. Orange, Alexandria & Manassas Railroad, 9 D.C. 314 (D.C. 1875).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Olin

delivered the opinion of the court:

In looking carefully through the papers in this case since the argument, I see no error in this ruling of the law by the justice presiding at the trial of this cause prejudicial to the plaintiff. If the judge committed any error in the conduct of the trial, it was in failing to instruct the jury to render a verdict for the defendant upon the ground that the plaintiff was guilty of gross negligence in voluntarily placing himself upon the track before an approaching railroad engine, by which he was run over and injured. What constitutes negligence usually is a mixed question of law and fact. But sometimes negligence is of a character so gross, that a judge may well instruct a jury that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover, and I think the undisputed fact of this case would render it eminently proper to give such direction.

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

Mr. Justice Olin

delivered the opinion of the court:

In looking carefully through the papers in this case since the argument, I see no error in this ruling of the law by the justice presiding at the trial of this cause prejudicial to the plaintiff. If the judge committed any error in the conduct of the trial, it was in failing to instruct the jury to render a verdict for the defendant upon the ground that the plaintiff was guilty of gross negligence in voluntarily placing himself upon the track before an approaching railroad engine, by which he was run over and injured. What constitutes negligence usually is a mixed question of law and fact. But sometimes negligence is of a character so gross, that a judge may well instruct a jury that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover, and I think the undisputed fact of this case would render it eminently proper to give such direction.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 D.C. 314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mills-v-orange-alexandria-manassas-railroad-dc-1875.