New Omaha Thomson-Houston Electric Light Co. v. Bendsen

102 N.W. 96, 73 Neb. 49, 1905 Neb. LEXIS 30
Nebraska Supreme Court·Decided January 5, 1905·No. No. 12,341·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Oldham, C.

The facts in this case are identical with those in the case of New Omaha Thomson-Houston Electric Light Co. v. Fred Anderson, Administrator of the Estate of Charles Hopper, Deceased, post, p. 84. The intestate in this case [50] met his death from the same cause and under the same conditions and surroundings as those occasioning the death of' Charles Hopper, his fellow workman; consequently, this case should follow the decision recently announced in that case.

Hence, for the reasons set forth in the above cited case, we recommend that the judgment of the district court be reversed and the cause remanded.

Barnes and Pound, CC., concur.

By the Court: For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion, the judgment of the district court is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed.

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

New Omaha Thomson-Houston Electric Light Co. v. Bendsen, 102 N.W. 96, 73 Neb. 49, 1905 Neb. LEXIS 30 (Neb. 1905).

102 N.W. 96 (New Omaha Thomson-Houston Electric Light Co. v. Bendsen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Burroughs Adding Machine Co. v. Fryar
132 Tenn. 612 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1915)