Legal Opinion

Heberer v. C. M. St. P. & P. Ry. Co.

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided October 19, 1931No. File No. 7208PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWarren, J.

Plaintiff’s threshing grain separator machine was struck by one of defendant’s passenger trains while the plaintiff’s agent was crossing defendant’s main or coast line on- the public highway crossing at a point about a half; of a mile west of James, S. D. The amount sued for was $1,000. The plaintiff’s agent testified in behalf of the plaintiff, and, in fact, his evidtence is -the only evidence offered by either party. The main line of defendant’s railroad tracks runs east and west. The plaintiff’s agent was traveling and pulling the tractor and separator from the north to the south. It was…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Green v. Los Angeles Terminal Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Wallis v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Virginia & Southwestern Railway Co. v. SkinnerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1916
  4. Butler v. Rockland, Thomaston & Camden Street RailwaySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1904
  5. Plinkiewisch v. Portland Ry. L. & P. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1911

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Nielsen v. RichmanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Anderson v. HuntworkSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1939

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API