Legal Opinion

Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. Mann

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided March 23, 1907No. 14,248PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Error to the district court for Adams county: Ed L. Adams, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtBarnes, J.

On the night of February 18, 1904, Gustave A. Mann, plaintiff below, fell into an ash pit between the rails of the railroad track of the defendant company while passing from the depot to the caboose of a freight train in which he was about to take passage from the city of Minden to his home in the city of Hastings. The result was a broken leg, to recover for which he brought this action against the company. Judgment being entered in his favor, the railroad company has taken error t- diis court.

The material facts from which the question of the liability of the railroad company must be…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Co. v. MarionIndiana Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Schaller v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Fremont, Elkhorn & Missouri Valley Railroad v. HagbladNebraska Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Oviatt v. Dakota Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
  5. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co. v. SchuldtNebraska Supreme Court · 1902

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Zantow v. Old Line Accident InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Reed v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Otto v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Painter v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Hulet v. PayneCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1922

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

Powered by the Exa API