Curtis v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Seott Ovreuit Court. This action was brought to compel the defendant to put. in an ojien crossing and a cattle guard at a point designated by him in a notice served by him upon the defendant. The court dismissed the plaintiff’s jietition, and rendered judgment for the defendant for costs. The plaintiff appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.
The abstract does not purport to contain all the evidence. The court made certain findings of fact, and we shall assume that they were supported by the evidence. The court found, in substance, that the defendant’s track crosses the plaintiff’s pasture; that the plaintiff requested the defendant to construct an open crossing at the place designated in a notice served; that the defendant refused to do so; that it had fenced the track on both sides, and put in gates, and claimed that that was sufficient; that an open crossing with cattle guards might have been put in at a reasonable expense, but…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Lough v. Minneapolis & St. Louis RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
- State v. Burlington, Cedar Rapids & Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1896
- Livingston v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1909
- Fowbel v. Wabash R. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1904