Maine v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Union District Court. — IíoN. W. H. Tedfobd, Judge. Action at law to recover for injuries alleged to have been caused by negligence on the part of the defendant. Various pleadings and motions were filed, and proceedings thereon had whieh resulted in a judgment for the defendant. The plaintiff appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.
In May, 1892, the plaintiff was in the service of the defendant as flagman and rear brakeman on one of its passenger trains. While in the line of his duty, he was injured by a collision of his train with another, which was going in an opposite direction on the same track. He alleges that the accident occurred by reason of the negligence of an employe of the defendant in failing to give to the conductor and engineer in charge of the plaintiff’s train a telegraphic order to hold that train at Red Oak until the train which was met should arrive there. The plaintiff further alleges that the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. BellNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Donald v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1895
- Eighmy v. Union Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1895
3Cited by17 opinions
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. McGuireSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. BeazleySupreme Court of Florida · 1907
- McGuire v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
- Burgess v. Sims Drug Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1901
- Virginia Iron, Coal & Coke Co. v. Odle's Adm'rSupreme Court of Virginia · 1920
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.