Union Pacific Railroad v. Anderson
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtLusk, J.
First. Construction of the “fifteen continuous miles” provision.
We are aware of no principle of statutory construction under which the court can say that the legislature intended that a railroad operation outside of this state should be added to one within the state in order to subject to the provisions of the act the freight operations of the plaintiff over the road of the Oregon Short Line east of Huntington. It will be remembered from the statement above that that line is not continuous for more than fifteen miles in this state, but is broken up into two parts — one 2.5 miles in length,…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Interstate Commerce Commission v. BairdSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Minis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1841
- Railway Co. v. PettySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
- American Express Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Hillman v. Northern Wasco County PUDOregon Supreme Court · 1958
- Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. La FolletteWisconsin Supreme Court · 1965
- Ore-Ida Potato Products, Inc. v. United Pacific InsuranceIdaho Supreme Court · 1964
- Scheele v. City of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 1963
- Matter of Adoption of EderOregon Supreme Court · 1991
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.