Commonwealth v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 12. — PROCEEDING BY MANDAMUS BY THE COMMONWEALTH AGAINST THE LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE R. R. CO., &c., TO COMPEL IT TO FURNISH ADDITIONAL FACILITES ON ITS ROAD FOR FREIGHT AND PASSENGERS Appeal from Shelby Circuit Court. William: Carroll, Circuit Judge.
Read the full summary
Case 12. — PROCEEDING BY MANDAMUS BY THE COMMONWEALTH AGAINST THE LOUISVILLE & NASHVILLE R. R. CO., &c., TO COMPEL IT TO FURNISH ADDITIONAL FACILITES ON ITS ROAD FOR FREIGHT AND PASSENGERS Appeal from Shelby Circuit Court. William: Carroll, Circuit Judge. From a judgment dismissing the petition the plaintiff appeals. 1. Practically the only defense offered by the Louisville & Nash¡yijle Railroad Company, is that the local traffic from and between Christiansburg and Shelbyville is not sufficient to justify the running of local trains; and under this contract with the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway…
1Opinion of the Court
■Opinion by
Judge Settle.
Reversing.
This action was instituted in the Shelby circuit court by the appellant, Commonwealth of Kentucky, against the appellee, Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, and the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, to compel them, through the mandatory process of the court, to furnish for the use of the public greater facilities for the transportation of passengers and freight over the line of railroad operated by them in and through Shelby county, particularly between Shelbyville and Christiansburg. It appears from the averments of the petition that the appellee,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Smyth v. AmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Smyth v. Ames; Smyth v. Smith; Smyth v. HigginsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Gladson v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Railroad Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- State v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1912
- Louisville & N. R. v. SilerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky · 1911
- Southern Railway Co. v. HatchettCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1917
- L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Central Stock Yards Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1906
- Sinclair v. Moore Central RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.