Wagner v. International Ry. Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained скачать в хорошем качестве

Wagner v. International Ry. Case Brief Summary | Law Case Explained

Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Wagner v. International Ry. | 133 N.E. 437 (1921) International Railway’s electric train line between Buffalo and Niagara Falls crossed the tracks of the New York Central and the Erie railroads on an overhead crossing with gentle inclines that led to sharp turns left and right. The tracks were laid on ties that were unguarded on the ends so that train cars overhung the drop below. A horrific accident that occurred on this structure led to the seminal rescue case Wagner versus International Railway. Arthur Wagner and his cousin Herbert boarded International’s train just before this overhead crossing. The train was crowded, and they had to stand on the platform outside the car. The platform had doors, but the conductor didn’t close them. The train went around the first curve of the crossing without slowing down. Near the start of the bridge, there was a violent lurch, and Herbert was thrown off. There were cries of “Man overboard!” The train proceeded across the bridge and stopped near the foot of the incline on the other side. Night had fallen. Wagner and the conductor and several others got out of the train to search for Herbert’s body. Wagner climbed up on the bridge and discovered Herbert’s hat sitting on a beam. Then, in the darkness, he missed his footing and fell to the ground below, landing where the other searchers had just found Herbert’s body. Wagner sued International, claiming that his injuries were the result of International’s negligence. Wagner claimed that the conductor asked him to walk along the trestle and up the bridge, and accompanied him with a lantern. The conductor denied both of these things. The trial court instructed the jury that, regardless of the railroad’s negligence toward Herbert, it shouldn’t find International liable for Wagner’s injuries unless the conductor had invited Wagner to go onto the bridge and had followed him with a light. The jury found for International, and the trial court directed a verdict for International. The appellate division affirmed. Wagner appealed to the New York Court of Appeals, arguing that the limitations in the jury instructions were incorrect. Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/wagner-... The Quimbee App features over 16,300 case briefs keyed to 223 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: https://www.quimbee.com/cases/wagner-... Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► https://www.youtube.com/subscription_... Quimbee Case Brief App ► https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-o... Facebook ►   / quimbeedotcom   Twitter ►   / quimbeedotcom   #casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries