Southern Railway Co. v. Dantzler
SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO. Et Al. v. DANTZLER, ADMINISTRATRIX
Opinion
Mr. Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is a companion case to No. 788, Southern Ry. Co.
v. Youngblood, decided this day, ante, p. 313. The respondent’s intestate was the engineer of the train known as Extra 483 West. He had on his person after the accident his copy of the orders received at Branchville. The negligence claimed is practically the same as in No. 788, and none is alleged as against any member of the decedent’s crew or that of the train with which his engine collided. After the accident Dantzler was taken to a hospital, where before his death he stated to two persons that the accident was his fault — that he forgot his orders and ran past the point where he was directed to pass the other train.
*319 For the reasons given in the opinion in No. 788 the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
Reversed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 6 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Northern Pacific Railway Company, a Corporation v. Tillie Mely, as Administratrix of the Estate of A. E. Mely, Deceased
- Southern Ry. Co. v. Woods
- Tate v. Chicago, M.S.P. P.R. Co.
- Ferguson v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc.
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Anderson
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co. v. Anderson
Most recent
- Ferguson v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc.
- Northern Pacific Railway Company, a Corporation v. Tillie Mely, as Administratrix of the Estate of A. E. Mely, Deceased
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co. v. Anderson
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Anderson
- Southern Ry. Co. v. Woods
- Tate v. Chicago, M.S.P. P.R. Co.
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.