Legal Opinion

City of Cincinnati v. Luckey

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided March 22, 1950No. 31907 and 31908PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWeygandt, C. J.

It is charged that on February 18, 1949, the two defendants were an engineer and conductor, respectively, in the employ of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, and that between seven and eight o’clock a. m. they operated an interstate freight train of 87 cars across Este avenue in the city of Cincinnati at a speed of 3 to 5 miles per hour, resulting in a blocking of the street for a period of at least 17 minutes, contrary to the provisions of Section 410-8 of the ordinances of that city.

That ordinance reads as follows:

“Section 410-8. Blocking Street Crossings. It shall be unlawful for any…

2Cited by12 opinions

  1. CSX Transportation, Inc. v. City of PlymouthDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2000
  2. Commonwealth v. New York Central RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1966
  3. Kahn v. Southern Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1953
  4. City of Lake Charles v. Southern Pacific Transp. Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1975
  5. Arrasmith v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1969

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

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

Powered by the Exa API