McQuilken v. Central Pacific Railroad
Cases that cite this one
8 later published cases cite this decision.
- Garot v. County of San Diego (United States District Court for the Southern District of California 2023)
- Whiteside v. SPSG Partners (United States District Court for the Eastern District of California 2022)
- Jacob v. Watson (Cal. Ct. App. 1931)
- Nichols v. Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railroad (Ind. Ct. App. 1904)
- Goldstone v. Merchants' Ice & Cold Storage Co. (Cal. 1899)
- Magee v. North Pacific Coast Railroad (Cal. 1889)
- Gerity's Admx. v. Haley (W. Va. 1886)
- Bowers v. Union Pacific Railroad (Utah 1885)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The judge charged the jury: “If the want of care of plaintiff contributed to the accident she cannot recover. Proof in some form that the plaintiff did not contribute to the injury constitutes part of the plaintiff’s ease.” And again: “The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show that she was, at the time of the accident in question, in the exercise of due care.” In Robinson v. W. P. R. R. Co. (48 Cal. 426), we held that negligence on the part of plaintiff, in cases like the present, is a matter of defense to be proved by defendant.
This ruling does not preclude the trial court from directing judgment by way of nonsuit, whenever the evidence introduced by plaintiff so conclusively establishes a defense
Order denying new trial reversed and cause remanded for new trial.
Mr. Chief Justice Wallace did not express an opinion.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.