Pullman Co. v. Linke
District Court, S.D. Ohio
At Faw. Action by the Pullman Company against William Finke and others. On final hearing. Judgment for plaintiff.
1Opinion of the Court
SATER, District Judge.
The question for decision is: Was the, sleeping car in question, under the facts disclosed, subject to attachment?
*1018The plaintiff is an Illinois corporation. Prior to November 20, 1909, it had furnished a sleeping car, “Eufaula,” to be used and which m fact was regularly used by the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company for the accommodation and transportation of passengers between the cities of Columbus, Ohio, and Washington, D. C., and intermediate stations. The car, as a part of one of the railroad company’s trains, on the date named left 'Columbus, its initial starting…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Coe v. ErrolSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- County of Mobile v. KimballSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Railroad Co. v. HusenSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Bowman v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Pullman Co. v. StrangCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1926