State ex rel. Lancaster County v. C., B. & Q. R.
Nebraska Supreme Court
Original application for mandamus. An act requiring railroads to maintain suitable crossings falls within the general police power of the state.
Read the full summary
Original application for mandamus. An act requiring railroads to maintain suitable crossings falls within the general police power of the state. (Thorpe v. Rutland R. Co., 27 Yt., 140; Roston & M. R. Co. v. Com’rs, 79 Me., 386; People v. JR. Co., 70 N. Y., 569.) In general, such maintenance is the duty of a railroad company whenever its line intersects a public highway, whether the latter be opened before or after the road is in operation. {People v. P. Co., 67 111., 118; Farley v. R. Co., 42 la., 234; Paducah & E. R. Co. v. Commonwealth, 80 Ky., 147 [10 Am. & Eng. R. R. Cases, 318]; Ferguson…
1Opinion of the CourtNoe val, J.
This is an original application for mandamus to compel the respondent to construct a crossing where its road crosses public highway No. 1119 of Lancaster county. The petition contains two counts. The first alleges “that the relator, the plaintiff, is the county of Lancaster, duly organized under the laws of the state of Nebraska.
“The defendant, the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company, commonly known as the Burlington & Missouri Railroad Company in Nebraska, is a corporation duly organized under and by virtue of the laws of the state of Nebraska, and is authorized to do business and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Thorpe v. Rutland & Burlington RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
- People Ex Rel. Green v. Dutchess & Columbia RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- People ex rel. City of Bloomington v. Chicago & Alton RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1873
- People Ex Rel. Kimball v. . B. and A.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1877
- State ex rel. Willard v. StearnsNebraska Supreme Court · 1881
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- State ex rel. City of Minneapolis v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. State ex rel. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
- Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. City of MilwaukeeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
- American Tobacco Co. v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1912
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.