Sweeney v. Central Pacific Railroad
Citations
- 57 Cal. 15
Syllabus
<p>Master and Servant—Negligence.—A servant voluntarily entering upon an employment, the dangers and hazards of which are known to Min, must be held to have assumed the consequences of such risks. Held, accordingly, that the defendant was not liable for the death of an employee, resulting from a collision caused by its failure to provide fences along the line of its road, if the deceased knew of the want of fences.</p> <p>New Trial—Verdict “against Law”—Definition.—Where a new .trial is asked, on the ground that the verdict is against law, and it appears that the jury must either have disregarded the law as given in the instructions of the Court, or else have found a fact wholly contrary to the evidence, the verdict is against law, and it is proper to grant a new trial on that ground.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- concluding it would not be impossible for hiring entity could contract 19 directly with business service providers, “direct their actions, and pay them,” although the 20 business service provider would be moving freight belonging to hiring entity’s customers
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Myrick
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.