Legal Opinion

United States v. Gulf, C. & S. F. Ry. Co.

District Court, W.D. Louisiana

Decided March 14, 1925No. 1466PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DAWKINS, District Judge.

This is an.action by the government on 12 counts to recover of the defendant the sum of $100 in each instance for the violation of, the Safety Appliance Act of March 2, 1893 (27 Stat. 531 [Comp. St. §§ 8605-8812]), as amended by Act approved April 1, 1896 (29 Stat. 85 [Comp. St. § 8610]), and as further amended by the Act of March 2, 1903 (32 Stat. 943 [Comp. St. §§ 8613-8615]). The jury has been waived and the case sub*723mitted upon an agreed statement of facts. The sole question, therefore, is one of law, and that is: Does the statute apply where the equipment moves…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  2. Southern Railway Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
  3. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
  4. United States v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
  5. Chicago, B. & Q. R. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1913

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. CoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1950
  2. (SS) Badillo v. Commissioner of Social SecurityDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
  3. Rendon v. Commissioner of Social Security AdministrationDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2022
  4. United States v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. CoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1950

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API