Hamrock v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an instruction was required because plaintiff put on evidence of performing a \dangerous job under orders and in the customary manner without safe alternatives\
• stating that “a court’s charge ... will be deemed proper only where it adequately and correctly covers the substance of the requested instructions and is fair to both parties”
• stating that \a court's charge ... will be deemed proper only where it adequately and correctly covers the substance of the requested instructions and is fair to both parties\
• concluding instruction is properly given when issue of assumption of risk is expressly or implicitly before jury, even though not explicitly raised at trial
• concluding instruction is properly given when issue of assumption of risk is expressly or implicitly before jury, even though not explicitly raised at trial
• use of assumption of risk instruction in a FELA case condemned by various courts where assumption of risk was not an issue and jury was properly instructed on contributory negligence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Laird v. Illinois Central Gulf Railroad
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1991-02-04· cited 27×
• Collins v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2010-12-01· cited 20×
• Duffield v. Marra, Inc.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1988-02-10· cited 18×
• Florine Russell v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation
  Seventh Circuit· 1999-08-31· cited 16×
• CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Bickerstaff
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2009-08-26· cited 11×
• Parsons v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2018-01-10· cited 5×
• Union Pacific Railroad v. Estate of Gutierrez
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 2014-08-21· cited 1×
• Unnamed case
  Tex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2014-08-21

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Rogers v. Missouri Pacific Railroad
  Supreme Court· 1957-02-25· cited 1,718×
• Lavender v. Kurn
  Supreme Court· 1946-03-25· cited 970×
• Tennant v. Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Co.
  Supreme Court· 1944-02-14· cited 904×
• Tiller v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
  Supreme Court· 1943-02-01· cited 727×
• Hall v. Chicago & North Western Railway Co.
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1955-01-21· cited 109×
• Bowman v. Illinois Central Railroad
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1957-03-20· cited 88×
• Finley v. New York Central Railroad
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1960-05-18· cited 83×
• Harry G. Seaboldt v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company (Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff) v. Thompson Mahogany Company (Third-Party Defendant)
  Third Circuit· 1961-06-20· cited 80×
• Francis v. Heater v. The Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company
  Seventh Circuit· 1974-06-05· cited 79×
• Rick E. Clark, & Cross-Appellee v. Burlington Northern, Inc., a Corporation, & Cross-Appellant
  Eighth Circuit· 1984-02-10· cited 74×
• Lorenzo R. Ybarra v. Burlington Northern, Inc., a Corporation
  Eighth Circuit· 1982-09-28· cited 56×
• Timothy L. Hall v. American Steamship Company
  Sixth Circuit· 1982-10-06· cited 45×
• Harp v. Illinois Central Gulf Railroad
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1977-11-28· cited 43×
• Mumma v. Reading Company
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 1965-11-09· cited 40×
• Alexander F. Koshorek v. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company
  Third Circuit· 1963-07-16· cited 31×
• Vandaveer v. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co.
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1966-12-31· cited 20×
• Earl Wantland v. Illinois Central Railroad Company
  Seventh Circuit· 1956-12-03· cited 10×
• O. P. Teets v. Chicago, South Shore and South Bend Railroad
  Seventh Circuit· 1956-12-10· cited 8×