Southern Railway Co. v. Hunter

Mississippi Supreme Court

Southern Railway Co. v. Hunter

74 Miss. 444

CourtMississippi Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1896

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 74 Miss. 444 (Southern Railway Co. v. Hunter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Southern Railway Co. v. Hunter, 74 Miss. 444 (Mich. 1896).

Pincite

Opinion

Whitfield, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

It very clearly appears from the testimony of Gresham himself that he did have a duty to perform for the master in regard to trespassers found on the train, to wit: “To carry them to the conductor, ’ ’ and if the conductor told him to put them off, “to pull the engineer down, stop the train, and put them off. ” This fact, under the plaintiff’s testimony as to what occurred, clearly distinguishes this case from the cases of Railroad Co. v. Latham, 72 Miss., 32, and Williams v. Railroad Co., 19 So. Rep., 90.

Affirmed.

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

Whitfield, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

It very clearly appears from the testimony of Gresham himself that he did have a duty to perform for the master in regard to trespassers found on the train, to wit: “To carry them to the conductor, ’ ’ and if the conductor told him to put them off, “to pull the engineer down, stop the train, and put them off. ” This fact, under the plaintiff’s testimony as to what occurred, clearly distinguishes this case from the cases of Railroad Co. v. Latham, 72 Miss., 32, and Williams v. Railroad Co., 19 So. Rep., 90.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 Miss. 444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southern-railway-co-v-hunter-miss-1896.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack