Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Saline Circuit Court; W. H. Evans, Special Judge; The complaint alleged that the appellant was a corporation owning the railroad in question, and, this allegation being material, the burden was on the plaintiff to prove it by a preponderance of the evidence. The statute provides that the penalty shall be paid by the corporation owning the road, and, being a penal statute, must be strictly construed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Saline Circuit Court; W. H. Evans, Special Judge; The complaint alleged that the appellant was a corporation owning the railroad in question, and, this allegation being material, the burden was on the plaintiff to prove it by a preponderance of the evidence. The statute provides that the penalty shall be paid by the corporation owning the road, and, being a penal statute, must be strictly construed. Kirby’s Digest, § 6595; 43 Ark. 415; 38 Ark. 519; 40 Ark. 97; 67 Ark. 357. Since the evidence fails to show ownership of the road in appellant and that appellant is a corporation, the…
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
A penalty of $200 was recovered from the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company in a civil action brought by the 'State because of a violation of section 6595 of Kirby’s Digest, which reads as follows: “A ibell of at least thirty pounds weight, or a steam whistle, shall be placed on each locomotive or engine, and shall be rung or whistled at the distance of at least eighty rods from the place where the said road shall cross any other road or street, and be kept ringing or whistling until it shall have crossed said road or street, under a penalty of two hundred dollars for every…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Proctor v. Hann. & St. Joe. R. R.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- Camp v. RogersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1877
- Schott v. HarveySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1884
- Parker v. Minneapolis & St. Louis RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1900
- State v. St. Joseph, St. Louis & Santa Fe RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Summers v. Road Improvement District No. 16Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Texas Bank Trust Co. of Beaumont v. SmithTexas Supreme Court · 1917
- Kerr, Administrator v. GreensteinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1948
- Prickett v. FarrellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1970
- Great Northern Railway Co. v. OakleyWashington Supreme Court · 1925
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.