GRIGGS
v.
HOUSTON

U.S. | 1881-10-01
104 U.S. 553 Supreme Court of the United States (1881) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 26 L. Ed. 840 · SCDB 1881-082 · 1881 U.S. LEXIS 2044
Cited by 17 cases
Opinion of the Court
Me. Chief Justice Waite

Mr. Chief Justice Waite delivered the opinion of the court.

We agree entirely with the court below in the opinion that the statutes in relation to railroads relied upon by the plaintiff in error are not applicable to the facts of this case. If upon the evidence the jury had brought in a verdict against the defendants it would have been the duty of the court to set it aside and grant a new trial. The case comes clearly within Railroad Company v. Jones (95 U. S. 489), which was followed below. It was right, therefore, to direct a verdict for the defendants. There was no such conflict of evidence as to make it necessary for the jury to pass on the facts.

Judgment affirmed.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Patton v. Tex. & Pac. Ry. Co., 179 U.S. 658 (U.S. 1901)
    …sputed, or is of such conclusive character that the court, in the exercise of a sound judicial discretion, would be compelled to set aside a verdict returned in opposition [*660] to it. Phœnix Ins. Co. v. Doster, 106 U. S. 30, 32; Griggs v. Houston, 104 U. S. 553; Randall v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, 109 U. S. 478, 482; Anderson County Commissioners v. Beal, 113 U. S. 227, 241; Schofield v. Chicago & St. Paul Railway Co., 114 U. S. 615, 618; ” Pelaware &c. Railroad v. Converse, 139 U. S. 469, 472. See also…
  • Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co. v. Groeger, 266 U.S. 521 (U.S. 1925)
    …Wall. 359, 369; Merchants’ Bank v. State Bank, 10 Wall. 604, 637; Improvement Co. v. Munson, 14 Wall. 442, 448; Pleasants v. Fant, 22 Wall. 116, 121— 122; Herbert v. Butler, 97 U. S. 319, 320; Bowditch v. Boston, 101 U. S. 16, 18; Griggs v. Houston, 104 U. S. 553; Phoenix Ins. Co. v. Doster, 106 U. S. 30, 32; Russell v. Allen, 107 U. S. 163; Anderson County Commissioners v. Beal, 113 U. S. 227, 241; People’s Savings Bank v. Bates, 120 U. S. 556, 561-562; North Penn. Railroad v. Commercial Bank, 123 U. S. 727…
  • Randall v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co., 109 U.S. 478 (U.S. 1883)
    …returned, must b.e set aside, the court is not bound to submit the case to the. jury, but may direct a verdict for the defendant. Pleasants v. Fant, 22 Wall. 116; Herbert v. Butler, 97 U. S. 319; Bowditch v. Boston, 101 U. S. 16; Griggs v. Houston, 104 U. S. 553. And it has recently been decided by the House of Lords, upon careful consideration of the previous cases in England, that it is for the judge to say whether any facts have been, established by sufficient evidence, from which negligence can be reaso…

Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw