Legal Opinion
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. City of Bridgman
District Court, W.D. Michigan
Decided September 17, 1987No. K85-531 CA4PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BENJAMIN F. GIBSON, District Judge.
This cause of action stems from a City of Bridgman (“City”) ordinance, passed on March 7, 1977, which limits the speed of trains passing through the City limits. In its pertinent part, the ordinance states:
It shall be unlawful for a railroad company to permit its trains to travel at a rate of speed in excess of 30 miles per hour within the City Limits of Bridgman. Bridgman, Mich., Ordinance No. 61 (March 7, 1977).
After unsuccessfully attempting to persuade the City to repeal the ordinance, the plaintiff Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company (“C & O”)…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Aetna Life Insurance v. HaworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Csx Transportation, Inc. v. City of Plymouth, MichiganCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- City of Covington v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1989
- Grand Trunk Western Railroad v. City of FentonMichigan Supreme Court · 1992
- CSX Transportation, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1988
- Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.