Chicago, B. & Q. R. v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Nebraska. Action by the United States against the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company. Judgment for the United States,' and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
SANBORN, Circuit Judge.
In an action against the railroad company under the 28-hour law, Act June 29, 1906, c. 3594, 34 Stat. 607 (U. S. Comp. Stat. Supp. 1907, p. 918; Supp. 1909, p. 1178), in which the defenses were that the company did not knowingly and *344willfully violate the law and that it was prevented from complying with it by accidental or unavoidable causes which could not be anticipated or avoided by the exercise of due diligence and foresight, the court below instructed the jury to return a verdict for the plaintiff, and this ruling is specified as error.
Section 1 of the Act of June…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Weeks v. Wilson Transit Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1894
- Southern Pac. Co. v. HetzerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1909
- United States v. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1911
- Chicago Great Western Ry. Co. v. EganCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1908
3Cited by18 opinions
- United States v. Illinois Central RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Grand Trunk Ry. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1915
- United States v. Philadelphia & R. Ry. Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1915
- Oregon-Washington R. & Nav. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1913
- Day Wood Heel Co. v. RoverOhio Supreme Court · 1931
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.