Legal Opinion

Graybill v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided January 18, 1901PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from Pottawattamie District Oourt. — Homy A. B. Ti-iornell, Judge. Action to recover tbe value of stock killed at a highway crossing. There was a trial to a jury, and a verdict and judgment 'for the plaintiff. The defendant appeals. — •

1Opinion of the CourtSiiebwin, J.

•1 The stock in question escaped from the plaintiff’s inclosure, and were killed in the daytime, on a highway crossing, by a train running as a special. Negligence is charged, in the operation of the train, in not using due care and watchfulness, and in not using the whistle and bell before reaching the crossing where the cattle were killed. It is also charged that the train was a wild one, and was at the time being run at a dangerously high rate of speed. There is a sharp conflict in the evidence as to whether the whistle was sounded and the bell rung at the whistling post for that crossing,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railroad v. HembreeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
  2. Orcutt v. Pacific Coast Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1890
  3. Hohl v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1895
  4. Palmer v. St. Paul & Duluth RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
  5. Gates v. B., C. R. & M. R. Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1874

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Canfield ex rel. Canfield v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1909
  2. Gregory v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
  3. Williams v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1908
  4. Monson v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1916
  5. Rekdahl v. CheneyOregon Supreme Court · 1930

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API