Legal Opinion
Lundeen v. Canadian Pacific R. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided July 2, 2008No. 07-1656, 07-1670, 07-1672, 07-1676, 07-1679, 07-1680, 07-1684, 07-1693, 07-1694, 07-1698, 07-1699, 07-1707PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
532 F.3d 682 (2008)
Tom LUNDEEN, individually; Nanette Lundeen, individually, and Tom Lundeen and Nanette Lundeen on behalf of, and as parents and natural guardians of M.L., a minor, and Michael Lundeen, Appellants,
v.
CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY; Canadian Pacific Limited; Canadian Pacific Railway Limited; Soo Line Railroad Company, Appellees,
United States, Intervenor.
State of North Dakota; State of Mississippi; State of Indiana; State of Iowa; State of Maryland; State of Minnesota; State of Missouri; State of Montana; State of Nevada; State of Oklahoma; State of South Dakota; State of New…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited51 opinions
- Carnegie-Mellon University v. CohillSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- United States v. HawleyDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 2011
- Boechler, P.C. v. CIRCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2020
- Rux v. Republic of SudanDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2009