Arizona Copper Co. v. Garcia
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtLyman, J.
Garcia, the appellee, claims to have been injured because of inadequate warning given him of the approach of appellant’s railway train at an intersection of its road and the country highway along which he was traveling. The crossing was at grade, as a part of a highway laid out after the construction of the railroad without permission of the Corporation Commission, as provided by statute. Paragraph 2319, Civ. Code Ariz. The crossing at the time of the collision and during a number of years immediately preceding was upon a thoroughfare between populous communities and frequented by travelers.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Continental Improvement Co. v. SteadSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Carleton v. Franconia Iron & Steel Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Dudley v. Northampton Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Barry v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Gilman v. Central Vermont Railway Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1919
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- St. Louis, B. & M. Ry. Co. v. PriceTexas Commission of Appeals · 1925
- Maynard v. City of HelenaMontana Supreme Court · 1945
- Southwest Metals Co. v. GomezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1925
- Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. WeilCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1933