Legal Opinion

Lanning v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R'y Co.

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided April 7, 1886PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal from, Wapello Circuit Court. Action to recover damages sustained by plaintiff by reason of the destruction of his property by fire set'out by an engine operated by defendant on its road. There was a judgment ón a verdict for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtReck, J.

We shall consider the objections to the judgment of the district court in the order of their discussion by counsel.

i. evidence market price: witnesses1: I. The evidence tended to prove that the fire set out by defendant’s engine injured or destroyed a hedge and certain grape-vines in a vineyard upon plaintiff’s lands, Two witnesses were permitted to testify to the value of the hedge and vines in order to establish plaintiff’s damage sustained by their injury or destruction. This evidence, counsel for defendant insist should not have been admitted, for the reason that it consisted of an…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fitzgerald v. McCartySupreme Court of Iowa · 1881
  2. Slossen v. B., C. R. & N. R.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1882
  3. Marion v. Chicago Rock Island & Pacific R'y Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1884
  4. Bell v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1884

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Jacksonville, Tampa & Key West Railway Co. v. Peninsular Land, Transportation & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1891
  2. Platter v. Minneapolis & St. Louis RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1913
  3. Croft v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1906
  4. Frederickson v. Iowa Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1912
  5. Stickling v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1930

5 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