Legal Opinion

Northern Pacific Railroad v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Minnesota

Decided July 1, 1880PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Hearing on order to show cause why a temporary injunction should not issue.

1Opinion of the Court

Nelson, D. J.

Application for an injunction to. restrain defendants from building the proposed railroad from Barnes-ville to Moorhead across the track of the plaintiff, and the strip of land upon which the same is constructed, and extending 200 feet on either side thereof, is heard upon bill, special answer, and affidavit of the president of the defendant, the Barnesville & Moorhead Railroad Company. It appears that the latter company has taken steps, according to the laws of the state of Minnesota, to obtain a right of way or crossing over the plaintiff’s railway track. The proceedings are…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hatch v. BurbankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1871
  2. Lohman v. St. Paul, Stillwater & Taylor's Falls RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Central Pacific Railway Co. v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API