East Line & Red River Railroad v. Scott
Citations
- 71 Tex. 703
- 10 S.W. 298
- 1888 Tex. LEXIS 1211
Syllabus
<p>1. Second Continuance—Diligence.—A second eontiuance was properly refused to the defendant, the Railway Company, upon its application, on account of the absence of an employe residing in another county, no effort having been made to take his depositions, his personal attendance being expected, but was not secured on account of a leave of absence having been granted the witness by one of the officers of the defendant.</p> <p>2, Employe.—Plaintiff, a watchman, in employ of the Railway Company, under order of the regular engineer, who, from sickness, was unable for duty, took charge of a working train and ran to where some pile driving was being done. The engine used in pile driving was on the rear car of the train. Plaintiff, upon stopping the train at its destination, went back to the car in which was the pile driver, boiler and engine, when its boiler exploded, injuring plaintiff; held, that the plaintiff was an employe and entitled to damages for injury received from imperfect implements furnished by the railway company.</p> <p>3. Same.—Nor is the relation of master and servant dissolved from th fact that by the ordinary work of plaintiff as watchman he was not on duty at the time or place of the explosion and injury.</p> <p>-4 Rules Prescribing Duties of Employes.—It was shown that a general rule of the service of the Railway Company forbade an engineer to give another charge of his engine; it was also shown that it was not intended that it be enforced, when, on account of sickness of the engi neer, it became necessary for his duties to be performed by another; held, that when the exception was shown to exist it was not in conflict with the rule, that the watchman, under the direction of the engineer, and in his inability, was in charge of the engine; and in such state of facts the watchman so engaged, was an employe, and entitled to protection as such.</p> <p>5. Same.—The fact that he was not engaged in labor at the time of the injury, he being with the train
Judges: Stayton
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.