Legal Opinion
United States v. Keokuk & H. Bridge Co.
District Court, S.D. Iowa
Decided February 7, 1891PublishedCited by 10 opinions
At Law. Action to recover penalties under provisions of sections 9 and 10 of the act of congress of August 11, 1888. On demurrer to petition.
1Opinion of the CourtShiras, J.
In the act of congress of August 11, 1888, (25 St. at Large, p. 424,) it is provided:
“Sec. 9. That whenever the secretary of war shall have good reason to believe that any railroad or other bridge now constructed, or which may be hereafter constructed, over any of the navigable water-ways of the United States is an obstruction to the free navigation of such waters by reason of insufficient height, width of span, or otherwise, or where there is difficulty in passing the draw-opening or the raft-span of such bridge by rafts, steamboats, or other water-craft, it shall be the duty of said…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Pennsylvania v. Wheeling & Belmont Bridge Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1856
- Gilman v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1866
- Escanaba Co. v. ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Miller v. Mayor of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Bridge Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Petterson v. ResorDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1971
- United States v. City of MolineDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1897
- E. A. Chatfield Co. v. City of New HavenU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut · 1901
- Hart & Miller Islands Area Environmental Group, Inc. v. Corps of Engineers of the United States Ex Rel. BurchDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1978
- United States v. Parkersburg Branch R.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1906
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.