New York Central R.R. v. Grimstad
264 F. 334 (1920)
Legal Analysis
Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.
Nature Of The Case
This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.
Facts
Grimstad (P) was a passenger on New York Central R.R.'s (D) barge. D's barge was bumped by a tug. P, who could not swim, fell overboard. P's wife saw him in the water. She ran to get help. When she returned with a rope, P had drowned. P sued under the Employer's Liability Act for damages from P's death. P's wife claimed that had there been a life preserver on board, she could have saved him. D moved to dismiss the complaint because the issue of whether a life preserver or life buoy would have saved D was pure speculation and conjecture in the absence of any testimony on that issue. The jury ruled for P, holding that D was negligent in not equipping the barge with life preservers. D appealed.
Issues
The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.
Holding & Decision
The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.
© 2007-2025 ABN Study Partner