United States v. Denver & R. G. R. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the District of Colorado.
1Opinion of the Court
VAN DEVANTER, Circuit Judge.
The matter here in controversy is the sufficiency of the complaint in a civil action to recover penalties under the safety appliance law of Congress. Act March 2, 1893, c. 196, 27 Stat. 531; Act April 1, 1896, c. 87, 29 Stat. 85 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3174) amended by Act March 2, 1903, c. 976, 32 Stat. 913 (U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907, p. 885). There are four counts in the complaint, each charging a distinct hauling of a car in moving interstate traffic when one of the couplers witli which it theretofore had been properly equipped was out of repair and…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. CookSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1904
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Ledbetter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Schlemmer v. Buffalo, Rochester & Pittsburg Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Jelke v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1918
- Weare v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1924
- Chicago Junction Ry. Co. v. KingCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1909
- Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1908
- Chicago, B. & Q. Ry. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1909
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.