Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Griffith

Citations

• 159 U.S. 603
• 16 S. Ct. 105
• 40 L. Ed. 274
• 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2328

Syllabus

<p>When the judgment actually rendered in the court below was for an amount giving this court jurisdiction, which amount was reached by adding to a verdict for $5000, interest from the time of the verdict to the time of the entry of the judgment in a district where the local state law does not permit that to be done, and the plaintiff below, although excepting to the allowance of interest, and to the refusal of the court below to permit a remittitur, brings no writ of error to correct the alleged error, this court cannot dismiss a writ of error brought by the defendant to review other rulings in the case.</p> <p>In an action against a railway company to recover damages for injuries caused by one of its trains striking a wagon in which the plaintiff and another woman were seated as it was crossing the track on a public highway at grade, the negligence of the defendant having been established, there was further evidence tending to show that the women were driving slowly and with a safe horse; that the train was several minutes behind time; that as they approached the low place at which a train. could be seen if one were there, they stopped to look and listen,' but neither saw . nor heard anything; that after stopping they started driving slowly up the hill to a point at the top between forty and fifty yards from the track, where the slope commenced, and there they stopped again and listened, but heard nothing; they then drove slowly down the hill, both listening all the time, without talking, and heard nothing; and that just .as they got to a cut and the horse had his feet on the nearest rail, the train came around a curve and the collision occurred. Held, that the question whether there was contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff was properly submitted to the jury for determination.</p>