R. R. v. . R. R.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
The Corporation Commission rendered the following judgment:
TRAVIS, Chairman: This is a proceedings brought by the Laurinburg and Southern Railroad Company for the purpose of having this Commission, pursuant to the powers conferred upon it by statute, prescribe what kind of interlocking switch or switches shall be installed and maintained by the plaintiff where its tracks cross the tracks of the defendant Seaboard Air Line Railway in the town of Laurinburg.
It appears that at the time of procuring the consent of the defendant to cross its tracks and right of way the plaintiff company entered…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Eubank v. City of RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Kaw Valley Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Craig v. LeitensdorferSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Bank of Glade Spring v. McEwenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
- Walls v. StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Utilities Commission v. Nantahala Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- In re Increase of Street Car Fares of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- In Re Utilities Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Walls v. StricklandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917