Brown v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific R'y Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from, Washington District Court. The plaintiff is tlie administratrix of the estate of T. N. Brown, deceased, who was a fireman on one of the defendant’s locomotive engines, and who. was killed by coming in contact with a snow bank which was close to the railroad over which deceased was at tbe time, with others, operating a train. There was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. Defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtBotilrock, J.
í railassumedr¿yCS dangersirom snow-banks. This is the second appeal in this case. See 64 Iowa, 652. The facts are very fully set forth in the former °P^n^onj au(l, as thuy ars substantially the same upon the present appeal, they need not be restated. It was held, on the first appeal, that ^]16 <jangers from snow-banks are inseparable from *162the operation of railroads where snow prevails, and is removed from the track by snow-plows, and that, when employes enter the service, they assume the risk of such dangers. In so holding we followed the case of Dowell v. Burlington C. R. & N. R'y Co., 62…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lovejoy v. Boston & Lowell RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
- Brown v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1884
- Dowell v. Burlington, Cedar Rapids & Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1883
3Cited by8 opinions
- Thain v. Old Colony RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894
- Wilson v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1913
- Bryce v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- Kenney v. MeddaughCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1902
- New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad v. OstmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1896
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.