Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Botsford
Citations
- 141 U.S. 250
- 11 S. Ct. 1000
- 35 L. Ed. 734
- 1891 U.S. LEXIS 2519
Syllabus
<p>A court of the United States cannot order a plaintiff, in an action for an injury to the person, to submit to a surgical examination in advance of the trial.</p>
About this case
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
1891 United States Supreme Court case
Union Pacific Railway Company v. Botsford, 141 U.S. 250 (1891), was a case before the United States Supreme Court .
Background
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Union_Pacific_Railway_Co._v._Botsford&action=edit§ion=1 "Edit section: Background")
]
A railroad passenger, Clara L. Botsford, sustained permanent injuries to her brain and spinal cord when a berth from a sleeping car fell upon her head. She sued the railroad for negligence in the construction of the railroad car which allegedly caused her injuries. The Union Pacific Railway Company claimed that it was entitled, without her consent, to an opportunity to surgically examine her to determine her diagnosis and the extent of her injuries.
Decision
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Union_Pacific_Railway_Co._v._Botsford&action=edit§ion=2 "Edit section: Decision")
]
The court disagreed, holding that there was no authority under the common law or statutory law for the trial court to order such an examination: "No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law."[1]
See also
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Union_Pacific_Railway_Co._v._Botsford&action=edit§ion=3 "Edit section: See also")
]
References
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Union_Pacific_Railway_Co._v._Botsford&action=edit§ion=4 "Edit section: References")
]
- ↑ _Union Pacific Railway Company v. Botsford _, 141 U.S. 250, 251 (1891).
External links
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Union_Pacific_Railway_Co._v._Botsford&action=edit§ion=5 "Edit section: External links")
]
- Text of Union Pacific Railway Company v. Botsford, 141 U.S. 250 (1891) is available from: Justia Library of Congress
Intentional Torts
Damages
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Union_Pacific_Railway_Co._v._Botsford&oldid=1311349580 "
Hidden categories:
Search
Search
Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Botsford
Add languages Add topic
Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that the trial court could not compel plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit to submit to an examination by defendant's physician
- holding that the trial court could not compel plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit to submit to an examination by defendant’s physician
- holding that “[n]o right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law.”
- holding that “[n]o right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law”
- noting action intended to injure is most likely to rise to level of con- science-shocking
- noting action intended to injure is most likely to rise to level of con- science-shocking
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Gray, Brewee, Beown
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.