Leak v. Rio Grande Western Railway Co.
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the district court of the third district, and from an order refusing a new trial, Hon. Charles S. Zane, judge. The opinion states the facts-
1Opinion of the Court
MINER, J.:
The plaintiff in this case was a teamster hauling ore from the mines at Bingham canyon, and placing it in cars provided for it by the defendant at Bingham, Utah. The-railroad track and yard at Bingham extend southwesterly down the canyon. The track lying east of the depot is called the “main track,” and the “ore track” is about 22 feet east of it. The “switch track” runs east of the ore track, and joins with it. ■ The widest point between the cars on these tracks is eight -feet and nine inches. At the place of the accident, the cars would be six feet and four inches apart. Between…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. IvesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Hartford Life Annuity Insurance v. UnsellSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Quibell v. Union Pacific Railway Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1891
3Cited by6 opinions
- Hall v. Ogden City Street Railway Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1896
- Pennington v. Redman Van & Storage Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1908
- Hickey v. Rio Grande Western Ry. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1905
- Peck v. Oregon Short Line RailroadUtah Supreme Court · 1902
- Burbidge v. Utah Light & Traction Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.