Krause v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1DissentQuinn, J.
(dissenting.)
I dissent. It is undisputed that, in moving to the log track, it was necessary for the loeocomotive to backup, pushing the 7 cars east past the depot and water tank; that the time of taking water was always for the engineer to determine; that it was the custom to go on to the log track with a full tank of water; that this custom was known to all members of the crew; that there was a street crossing about 3 carlengths east from the water tank; that there was a slack of from 6 to 12 inches in each coupling between cars; that the air was not connected on the string; that, when the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Wyatt v. Pacific Elec. Ry. Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Eisentrager v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- Thomas v. Boston Elevated Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Rogers v. GookinMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
- Perkins v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.