Skip to main content
· 4/6/1903

Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Carlin

Citations

  • 189 U.S. 354
  • 23 S. Ct. 585
  • 47 L. Ed. 849
  • 1903 U.S. LEXIS 1359

Syllabus

<p>Where it is the special duty of the foreman of a gang repairing a bridge to see that the track is unobstructed when a train is about to cross, although it may be the duty of the men to keep their tools off the track, it is the foreman’s duty to supervise them, and if, through his negligence, the track is not left unobstructed and one of the gang is injured, such negligence under the statutes of Texas in that regard is that of a vice-principal and not of a fellow-servant.</p> <p>Where the facts in the case are that the workman was injured by being hit by a spike maul which had been left on the track and which was struck and thrown by the engine, the fact that the foreman himself, who is to some extent an interested witness, testifies that he had looked along the track and saw no obstruction, is not sufficient to take the question of his negligence away from the jury.</p>

Judges: Peckham

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced 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.