Page images
PDF
EPUB

NEGLIGENCE REPORTS

CURRENT SERIES

[CITED AM. NEG. REP.

ALL THE CURRENT NEGLIGENCE CASES DECIDED IN THE FEDERAL
COURTS OF THE UNITED STATES, THE COURTS OF LAST
RESORT OF ALL THE STATES AND TERRITORIES AND

SELECTIONS FROM THE INTERMEDIATE COURTS

TOGETHER WITH

NOTES OF ENGLISH CASES AND ANNOTATIONS

EDITED BY
JOHN M. GARDNER

OF THE NEW YORK BAR

VOL. V

NEW YORK
REMICK & SCHILLING

COPYRIGHT, 1899

BY

REMICK & SCHILLING

WEED-PARSONS PRINTING COMPANY,
PRINTERS, ELECTROTYPERS AND BINDERS,

ALBANY, N. Y.

[ocr errors][merged small]

In this volume, 5 AMERICAN NEGLIGENCE REPORTS, the plan of the previous volumes of the Current Series of Reports of Negligence cases has been extended by the addition of many notes upon the cases reported, a list of which notes is to be found at the end of the Table of Cases Reported.

The cases reported comprise those arising out of Negligence of Carriers, Corporations, Landlord and Tenant, Master and Seryant, Municipal Corporations, Railroads, etc., during 1898 and 1899, decided in the highest courts of the States and Territories of Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois (Supreme and Appellate Courts), Indiana (Supreme and Appellate Courts), Indian Territory, Iowa, Kansas (Supreme and Appellate Courts), Kentucky, Louisiana Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri (Supreine and Appellate Courts), Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey (Supreme Court and Court of Errors and Appeals), New Mexico, New York (Court of Appeals and Appellate Division of Supreme Court), North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota Tennessee, Texas (Supreme Court and Court of Civil Appeals), Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming, together with cases in the Circuit Courts, Circuit Courts of Appeal, and the Supreme Court of the United States.

Annotations and notes of English cases will be found of interest in connection with the citations in several of the decisions

a

reported herein. The Table of Cases Classified, which precede the Index, is a ready guide to a case in point.

The Editor cordially acknowledges the able services of M Alfred J. Hook, of the Brooklyn Law Library, in the preparati of the cases and notes in this volume of American Negligen Reports, and also acknowledges the able services of Mr. Walt J. Eagle, in the compilation of the Tables, etc., and seeing t volume through the press.

JOHN M. GARDNER. New York, June, 1899.

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

TABLE OF CASES REPORTED.

[For convenience of reference the official citations of the cases reported herein, so far as the same have appeared to date of publication of this volume, together with citations of other systems of reports, are added to this Table. Notes of current cases are designated by the letter n preceding the number of the page on which the same appear in this volume, as for instance: Auld v. Manhattan Life Ins. Co., 34 App. Div. (N. Y.) 491......1154.

PAGE

A Adams v. Swift.....

Mass.; 52 N. E. 1068... ...607 Alabama Great Southern R. R. Co. v. Coggins ....88 Fed. 455.

- 534 Allard v. Hildreth..

Mass.; 52 N. E. 1061.

.610 Anderson v. Hayes.

Wis.; 77 N. W. 891.

.504 Andre v. Winslow Bros. Elevator Co.. Mich.; 76 N. W. 86.

1153 Armaindo v. Ferguson....

.37 App. Div. (N. Y.) 160; 55 N. Y. Supp. 769...

.419 Aslen v. Village of Charlotte... .N. Y. App. Div.; 54 N. Y. Supp.

754

n272 Atchison v. Plunkett.

Kan. App.; 55 Pac. 677.

.343 Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe R’y Co. v. Carter. Kan.; 55 Pac. 279....

· 347 Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe R. R. Co. v. Henry... Kan.; 56 Pac. 486.

.593 Atha & Illingworth Co. v. Costello....N. J.; 42 Atl. 766.

.655 Atlantic City R’y Co. v. Goodin.... N. J.; 42 Atl. 333.

.407 Auld v. Manhattan Life Ins. Co.......34 App. Div. (N. Y.) 491; 54 N. Y.

Supp. 222...

.1154 Ayres v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western R. R. Co.....

158 N. Y. 254; 53 N. E. 22. ........683

B
Baltimore & Ohio R. R. Co. v. Joy....173 U. S. 226......

..760 Barce v. City of Shenandoah. ..Iowa; 76 N. W. 747.

.1270 Barkley v. New York Central & Hudson River R. R. Co..... .35 App. Div. (N. Y.) 228. .....

.218 Barrett v. Great Northern R’y Co...... Minn.; 77 N. W. 540.

181 Barrett v. New York Central & H. R. R. R. Co....

. 157 N. Y. 663; 52 N. E. 659.......11298 Bartlett v. Town of Clarksburg. W. Va.; 31 S. E. 918.

.492

« PreviousContinue »