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

Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Green

• 1890 • 140 U.S. 49 • Fuller Court
In the 1890 case of Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Green, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroad company, reversing a decision by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The dispute arose when Mr. Green was injured while working for another company on property owned by Pennsylvania Railroad Company and sued for damages under state law that held landowners liable for injuries occurring on their premises due to unsafe conditions or activities conducted thereon. The court found that since...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 Fuller Court
Term: 1890
Docket: 315
140 U.S. 49
11 S. Ct. 650
35 L. Ed. 339
1891 U.S. LEXIS 2431
Argued: Apr 16, 1891

Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Green

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the 1890 case of Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Green, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railroad company, reversing a decision by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The dispute arose when Mr. Green was injured while working for another company on property owned by Pennsylvania Railroad Company and sued for damages under state law that held landowners liable for injuries occurring on their premises due to unsafe conditions or activities conducted thereon. The court found that since Mr.Green's employer had control over his work environment at the time of injury, it was not appropriate to hold Pennsylvania Railroad responsible as they did not have direct control over where or how he worked despite owning the property where he got injured.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Green, it was argued that the majority's decision to hold a railroad company liable for injuries sustained by an employee due to negligence of another employee contradicts established principles of law and precedent. The dissent emphasized that under common law, employers are not responsible for accidents caused by fellow servants in the same employment. It was also pointed out that this principle has been recognized and applied consistently in numerous previous cases involving similar circumstances. Furthermore, they contended that changing this rule would have far-reaching implications on all industries where there is potential risk involved in work activities, which could lead to unjust outcomes and excessive litigation against businesses. Therefore, according to the dissenters' view, responsibility should lie with individual employees who cause harm through their negligent actions rather than placing undue burden on employers.

Opinion written by Justice
Decided: Apr 20, 1891
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