Legal Opinion

Larson v. Cleveland Railway Co.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 30, 1943No. 29342, 29345 and 29351PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHast, J.

The defendant The Nickel Plate Bailroad Company contends that its failure, if any, to repair the bridge in question does not impose upon it a tort liability in favor of the plaintiff as a third person, but that its liability, if any, is limited to a breach of its contract with the city of Cleveland which alone is entitled to call upon it to respond in damages and then only when the city has sustained a loss in the payment of a judgment rendered as a result of the lack of repair of the bridge in question.

In many cases and under many circumstances a railroad company has been held liable to…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Chicago City v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1863
  2. City of Rochester v. . CampbellNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  3. Bello v. ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1922
  4. City of Wooster v. ArbenzOhio Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Losito v. Kruse, Jr.Ohio Supreme Court · 1940

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Sharon Hageman, Admx. Of the Estate of Donald Hageman v. Signal L. P. Gas, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1973
  2. Travelers Indemnity Co. v. TrowbridgeOhio Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Ostrander v. Parker-Fallis Insulation Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Logsdon v. Main-Nottingham Investment Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1956
  5. Price v. McCoy Sales & Service, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1965

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

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

Powered by the Exa API