Burnham v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.
Nebraska Supreme Court
Appeal from tbe district court for Lancaster county: Albert J. Cornish, Judge.
1Opinion of the Court
Epperson, C.
On its Lincoln and Denver line of road, about two miles southwest of Lincoln, the defendant maintains a station called “Burnham,” which is not an incorporated town, village or city. At this station defendant has its sheep yards; barns and pasture, where sheep in transit are unloaded and cared for. There are no general stock yards, depot buildings, elevators, corncribs or coal houses at or near this station. In the sheep yards there are at times from 20,000 to 30,000 sheep, and several hundred cars are there loaded and unloaded during.the year. This traffic averages 10 cars a day,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Rabidon v. Chicago & West Michigan Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1897
- Grondin v. Duluth, South Shore & Atlantic Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1894
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. SevcekNebraska Supreme Court · 1904
- Chicago, B. & Q. R. v. HoganNebraska Supreme Court · 1890
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. HoganNebraska Supreme Court · 1889
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Anderson v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1918
- Jacoby v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1917
- Burnham v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1910
- Miller v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadWyoming Supreme Court · 1910
- De Graw v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1917
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.