De Lashmutt v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Mills District Court. — Iíon. N. W. Macy, • Judge. Suit to recover damages alleged to have been, caused by an insufficient waterway under one of appellants’ bridges. There was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiffs. The defendants appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtSherwin, J.
In 1907 the plaintiffs, as partners, were engaged in farming a large tract of land, and they were damaged by water which passed onto a part of said land through a break in the west levee of the Pony Creek ditch. The Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Bailroad Company is the owner of a north and south road that crosses the ditch in question on a steel girder bridge about sixty-six feet in length; the distance between the banks of the ditch at that point being fifty feet or more. The steel girders are about six and one-half feet wide, and at the time in question they extended below the top of the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Railroad Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Harvey v. Mason City & Fort Dodge RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
- Langhammer v. City of ManchesterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1896
- Lee v. Southern Pacific RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Houghtaling v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1902
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Hawley v. Davenport, Rock Island & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1951
- Thompson v. Illinois Central RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- Estes v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1913
- Sorenson v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- Guy v. PayneSupreme Court of Iowa · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.