Northern Pacific Railroad v. Mares

Citations

• 123 U.S. 710
• 8 S. Ct. 321
• 31 L. Ed. 296
• 1887 U.S. LEXIS 2209

Syllabus

<p>ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF DAKOTA.</p> <p>Accident Ins. Co. v. Crandal, 120 U. S. 524, affirmed to the point that the refusal of the court to instruct the jury, at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence, that he is not entitled to recover, cannot be assigned for error, if the defendant afterwards introduces evidence.</p> <p>Under all the circumstances set forth in the statement of facts and the opinion of the court, it was for the jury to determine whether the failure on the part of the plaintiff to work with his fellow-servant was, in fact, contributory negligence on his part; and on the whole case it appears that the cause was submitted by the court to the jury fairly, and with an accurate statement of the law applicable to the relation between the parties.</p>