Legal Opinion

Wallace v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha R'y Co.

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided December 12, 1885PublishedCited by 37 opinions

Appeal from Woodbury District Cov/rt. The plaintiff, who was a train conductor on defendant’s railroad, claims damages for a personal injury which he alleges he received by reason of the negligence of the defendant in failing to surface up and fill in earth between the ties uj>on which the iron rails of the track were laid. Theve was a trial by jury. Yerdict and judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtNotebook, J.

The plaintiff was the conductor of a transfer train engaged in moving cars across the Missouri river between Sioux City, Iowa, and Covington, Nebraska, by means of boats, and in making up trains and switching ears upon transfer tracks and side tracks. These transfer tracks were not permanent structures. By reason of the changing of the channel and banks of the river, the landing of the boats and the transfer tracks were required to be frequently moved. The tracks were laid down in a temporary manner, and the spaces between the ties were not filled up, and the ties were not placed at uniform…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Bell v. ByersonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1860

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. Och v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1895
  2. Fivey v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1902
  3. Mateer v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1891
  4. Haviland v. Southern California Edison Co.California Supreme Court · 1916
  5. O'Brien v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1894

32 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