Legal Opinion

Missouri Pac. R. v. Norwood

District Court, W.D. Arkansas

Decided July 1, 1935No. 501PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

In 1907, Arkansas enacted a “full crew” law (affecting freight trains) requiring three brakemen on trains of 25 or more cars (Ark. Laws 1907, Act No. 116 [page 295]) and, in 1913, a “full crew” law requiring 3 switch “helpers” in all cities of the first and second class where switching movements were made across public crossings within the city limits (Ark. Laws 1913, Act No. 67 [page 211]). The validity of these laws was promptly questioned. The contest and controversy was over the third brakeman and the third switch helper; the railways contending these third men were unnecessary. The…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
  2. Missouri Pacific Railroad v. NorwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  3. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  4. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
  5. Missouri Pac. R. Co. v. NorwoodDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1930

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Co. v. HardinDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1965
  3. New York Central Railroad v. LefkowitzNew York Supreme Court · 1965
  4. Adams, Inc. v. Louisville & Jefferson County Board of HealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1969
  5. New York Central Railroad v. LefkowitzNew York Court of Appeals · 1968

4 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