Legal Opinion

United States v. Erie R.

District Court, D. New Jersey

Decided January 12, 1909PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FANNING, District Judge.

This is an action for the recovery of four penalties of $100 each for four alleged violations by the defendant of the safety appliance act of March 2, 1893 (Act March 8, 1893, c. 196, 27 Stat. 531 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3174J), as amended April 1, 1896 (Act April 1, 1896, c. 87, 29 Stat. 85), and March 2, 1903 (Act March 2, 1903, c. 976, 32 Stat. 943 [U. S. Comp. St. Supp. 1907, p. 885]). The declaration contains four counts — one devoted to each of the alleged violations. A jury trial was had, at which a verdict was rendered against the defendant on each of the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Southern Pacific Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1904
  2. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  3. The Employers'liability CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  4. Hanley v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1903
  5. St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. DelkCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1908

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Erie R. v. RussellCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1910
  2. Western Union Telegraph Co. v. BollingSupreme Court of Virginia · 1917
  3. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1910
  4. United States v. YaquintaDistrict Court, N.D. West Virginia · 1962
  5. United States v. WilsonDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1920

2 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