Legal Opinion

Koeller v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided March 16, 1911No. 16,341PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from the district court for Lancaster county: Lincoln Frost, Judge.

1Opinion of the CourtBarnes, J.

Action on a certificate issued to the plaintiff by the relief department of the Chicago, Burlington .& Quincy Railway Company. It appears without dispute that the defendant maintains and conducts what is known as its “Voluntary Relief Department”; that the plaintiff, who was employed by the defendant in its railroad shops at Havelock, became a member of that department, and the certificate in question was issued to him on the 22d day of March, 1897; that he paid his dues and assessments thereon up to the date of his injury, which occurred while in defendant’s service, and at that time he was…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. WymoreNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. BellNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. CurtisNebraska Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Miller v. Chicago, B. & Q. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Colorado · 1894
  5. Oyster v. Burlington Relief DepartmentNebraska Supreme Court · 1902

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. GravittCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1976
  2. Grandillo v. Pennsylvania RailroadSuperior Court of Delaware · 1932
  3. Roberson v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1922

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

Powered by the Exa API