Legal Opinion
Northern Pacific Ry. Co. v. Weinberg
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided November 18, 1943No. 313PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NORDBYE, District Judge.
Th.e ordinance reads as follows:
“Section 1. (a) That the word ‘person’ as used in this ordinance is defined to mean any person, firm, partnership, association, corporation, trustee, receiver or other court officer, and the plural of each.
“(b) That the word ‘locomotive’ as used in this ordinance is defined to mean any and all railway engines, however propelled, when in use in the switching or transferring of railway cars upon railroad tracks within the corporate limits of the City of Duluth.
“Section 2. That to promote and protect the safety and welfare of employes…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Evison v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Seaboard Air Line Railway v. BlackwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- State ex rel. Young v. Standard Oil Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1910
- Licha v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1937
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- City of Duluth v. CervenySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
- Northern National Bank v. Northern Minnesota National BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- Southern Pacific Company v. DickersonNevada Supreme Court · 1964
- Co-operative Legislative Committee of the Transportation Brotherhoods v. Public Utilities CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1964
- Lewis v. HarnessAppellate Court of Illinois · 1967