Legal Opinion
Leuthold v. Pennsylvania R.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided June 29, 1929No. Nos. 5187, 5188PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MOORMAN, Circuit Judge.
These suits for damages grow out of a collision of a train with an automobile at a railroad crossing on one of the principal streets of Bueyrus, Ohio. The plaintiffs are father and son. According to their evidence, they ap- • proaehed the crossing at a speed of 10 or 12 miles an hour, and, as they did so, sheds and brdldings of the company obstructed their view of the train until they were too close-to the track to stop their ear and avoid the-collision. It was the custom of the company to have a flagman at the crossing when trains were approaching it. Both of the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. GoodmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Hines v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1921
- Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Erie R. Co. v. SchultzCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1911
- Canadian Pac. Ry. Co. v. SlaytonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Erie R. Co. v. StewartCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930
- Wabash Ry. Co. v. WalczakCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1931
- Audirsch v. Texas & Pacific Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952
- Pennsylvania R. v. ShindledeckerCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930
- Gordon H. Mitchell v. Roy P. Parham and Oklahoma Alcoholic Beverage Control BoardCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1966
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.