Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. City of Connersville
Indiana Supreme Court
From the Fayette Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtHackney, J.
In attempting to exercise the power granted by the act approved March 4,1893 (Acts 1893, p. 302), the appellee, the city of Connersville, adopted an ordinance, declared by the bill to be for the purpose of providing for the safety of persons from the running of railroad trains through said city, the first section of which ordinance was as follows:
“Section 1. Any railroad company or railway company running and operating its engines and cars upon what is known as the White Water Division of the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Bailway Company, situated in said city,' is hereby…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- City of Shelbyville v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1896
3Cited by9 opinions
- In Re SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
- Goodwine v. CadwalladerIndiana Supreme Court · 1901
- Chicago & South Eastern Railway Co. v. GloverIndiana Supreme Court · 1901
- In re the Estate of MertesIndiana Supreme Court · 1914
- Rice v. MagenheimerIndiana Supreme Court · 1947
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.