Legal Opinion
Burlington Northern Railroad v. Soo Line Railroad
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided December 13, 1993No. Civ. 4-93-55PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MacLAUGHLIN, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment and motion for a preliminary injunction. Both motions will be granted.
FACTS
I. 1902 Agreement
On May 28, 1902, the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company (Milwaukee) and the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Company (CB & Q) entered into an agreement to combine their individual single tracks between St. Paul, Minnesota and St. Croix Junction, which is near Hastings, Minnesota, to create a double or paired track arrangement. Pursuant to the 1902 agreement,…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bank One, N.A. v. CoatesDistrict Court, S.D. Mississippi · 2001
- Parkerson v. SmithMississippi Supreme Court · 2002
- Apryl L. Parkerson v. Wayne SmithMississippi Supreme Court · 2000