Legal Opinion

Chicago & Erie Railroad v. Luddington

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided October 9, 1894No. 1,190PublishedCited by 4 opinions

From the Porter Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtReinhard, J.

The first error complained of is the overruling of appellant’s demurrer to the appellee’s complaint. It is contended by appellant’s counsel that the complaint fails to show that the alleged negligence of the appellant was the proximate cause of the appellee’s injury. It is averred, amongst other things, that the appellant, in running its locomotives and cars over its road, carelessly and negligently omitted to use spark arresters or other appliances to prevent the emission of sparks from said locomotives, and carelessly and negligently omitted to keep its right of way clear of dry and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. NitscheIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Chicago, St. Louis & Pittsburgh Railroad v. WilliamsIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Pennsylvania Co. v. WhitlockIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
  4. Brummit v. FurnessIndiana Court of Appeals · 1891

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Indiana Horseshoe Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Fire Ass'n of Philadelphia v. YeagleyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1905
  3. Lake Erie & Western Railroad v. KeiserIndiana Court of Appeals · 1900
  4. Chicago & Erie Railroad v. LeshIndiana Supreme Court · 1902

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

Powered by the Exa API