Legal Opinion · Dissent

Union Pacific Railroad v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided January 23, 1974No. 316-68Published

1DissentSeeuton, Judge

I respectfully dissent. The railroad cars in this case were not delivered to the defendant consignee in Denver, Colorado, due to the fault of the plaintiff railroad in failing to have sufficient trackage in Denver to accommodate the oars. A number of cases have held that the lack of trackage or other facilities to handle cars is the fault of the railroad. This identical question was decided by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) in the case of Holding of Loaded Grain Oars — Texas Gulf Ports, Export, 321 I.C.C. 328 (1963). In that case the railroad lacked sufficient facilities at…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. United States v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952
  2. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company v. Moore-Mccormack Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1966
  3. Granger v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1924
  4. St. Louis, Southwestern Railway Co. v. MaysDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1959
  5. C & H Transportation Co., Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1971

15 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