Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Haight v. Railroad Company

• 1867 • 73 U.S. 15 • Chase Court
Haight v. Railroad Company was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1867. The case involved a dispute between the plaintiff, William Haight, and the defendant, the New York and New Haven Railroad Company. Haight had been injured while working on the railroad and sued the company for damages. The Supreme Court held that the railroad company was liable for Haight's injuries. The Court reasoned that the company had a duty to provide a safe workplace for its employees and that it had...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Chase Court
Term: 1867
73 U.S. 15
18 L. Ed. 818
1867 U.S. LEXIS 933

Haight v. Railroad Company

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

Haight v. Railroad Company was a case heard by the United States Supreme Court in 1867. The case involved a dispute between the plaintiff, William Haight, and the defendant, the New York and New Haven Railroad Company. Haight had been injured while working on the railroad and sued the company for damages. The Supreme Court held that the railroad company was liable for Haight's injuries. The Court reasoned that the company had a duty to provide a safe workplace for its employees and that it had failed to do so. The Court also held that the company was liable for any injuries that occurred as a result of its negligence. The Court's decision in Haight v. Railroad Company established the principle that employers have a duty to provide a safe workplace for their employees. This decision has been cited in numerous cases since then and has been used to support the idea that employers must take reasonable steps to protect their employees from harm.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Haight v. Railroad Company, Justice Field dissented from the majority opinion that held that a railroad company was not liable for damages caused by its negligence in failing to provide sufficient brakes on one of its cars. He argued that it was well established law at the time that when an individual or corporation is engaged in a business which involves risk and danger to others, they must use reasonable care and diligence to prevent injury or damage resulting from their operations. In this case, he believed there was evidence showing negligence on behalf of the railroad company as it had failed to properly equip its car with adequate brakes despite knowing about potential risks associated with such an omission. Therefore, Justice Field concluded that liability should have been imposed upon them for any injuries sustained due to their neglectful actions.

Opinion written by Justice RCGrier
Decided: Feb 10, 1868
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms