Chicago G. W. Ry. Co. v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Tu Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota. On the 21st day of September, 1885, a contract was entered into between the St. Paul & Northern Pacific Railway Company, party of the first part, the Northern Pacific Railroad Company, party of the second part, and Minnesota & Northwestern Railroad Company, party of the third part, relating to the joint use and operation of a certain portion of the St. Paul A Northern Pacific Railway Company’s…
Read the full summary
Tu Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Minnesota. On the 21st day of September, 1885, a contract was entered into between the St. Paul & Northern Pacific Railway Company, party of the first part, the Northern Pacific Railroad Company, party of the second part, and Minnesota & Northwestern Railroad Company, party of the third part, relating to the joint use and operation of a certain portion of the St. Paul A Northern Pacific Railway Company’s tracks. The plaintiff in this case has succeeded to the rights of the Northern Pacific Railroad Company and the St. Paul…
1Opinion of the CourtCaldwell, Circuit Judge
Contracts between railroad companies similar to the one in suit are not uncommon, and the obligations of the companies entering into them are commonly well understood. While such contraéis provide for the joint use of the railroad track, it is obvious that the several companies cannot each have its own time-table, train master, tower men, operators, and the like for regulating the movement of its trains over the joint track. The regulation and movement of trains over the joint track must necessarily he committed to a single head. That is a business which admits of no divided authority. And…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Chicago v. SheldonSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Topliff v. TopliffSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- District of Columbia v. GallaherSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Knox County v. Ninth National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Metropolitan Nat. Bank v. Benedict Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1896
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Guaranty Trust Co. of New York v. KoehlerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1912
- Lowery v. WestheimerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Gann v. BallSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Haydel v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1900
- New Brantner Extension Ditch Co. v. KramerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1914
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.