Carolyn Crockett v. The Long Island Railroad

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “jury could not logically award all costs for the surgery and no damages for future pain and suffering”
• holding the locomotive not in use where the injury occurred during a “between run inspection,” to a repairman who was the only employee working on the train, and where the engine was not idling
• considering the totality of circumstances, including the fact that the train at issue was inactive on a yard track awaiting cleaning, the locomotive was not idling, the train was not being readied for imminent departure, and the plaintiff was the only employee working on the train
• Boiler Act inapplicable when “appearance maintainer” was injured while cleaning windows of train that had been inactive for eight hours, was sitting on a “yard track” and was not.to be used until the next day

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).