Heenan v. Horre Coal Co.
Walter Heenan, Respondent, v. Horre Coal Company, Appellant
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by Paekee, J.
We conclude that the judgment of the Supreme Court, reversing that of the Common Pleas and remanding the cause for a new trial, should be affirmed, and in the main for the reasons stated in the per curiam opinion of the Supreme Court.
The case appears to be within the lines of our decision in Bernadsky v. Erie Railroad Co., 76
189 , and the earlier case (cited by the Supreme Court) of West Jersey and Seashore Railroad Co.
v. Welsh, 62
655. We agree that there was a jury question as to the actual or implied authority of defendant’s servant, employed as a watchman, to eject trespassers from the premises including the coal trestle, and that if such authority existed, and if in ejecting a trespasser by virtue thereof unnecessary force was used, the master would be liable in compensatory damages even if the conduct was legally malicious, so long as *389 it was within the scope of employment. A claim for punitive damages as against the master would be a very different matter. See Wendelken v. New York, &c., Railroad Co., 88
Id. 270;
377 , and cases cited. The point is noted because the case must go back for a retrial.
The judgment under review is affirmed.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Perskie, Van Buskirk, Kays, Heteield, Dear, Wells, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.