Northeastern Reporter, Volum 78Includes the decisions of the Supreme Courts of Massachusetts, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, and Court of Appeals of New York; May/July 1891-Mar./Apr. 1936, Appellate Court of Indiana; Dec. 1926/Feb. 1927-Mar./Apr. 1936, Courts of Appeals of Ohio. |
Inni boken
Resultat 1-5 av 100
Side 30
for a right of way 50 feet wide for its railroad acroSS 10 acres of land owned by
appellee Martin Flaherty, who took the summons to Thomas W. Prindeville, an
attorney, and employed him to look into the matter and make defense. The
attorney ...
for a right of way 50 feet wide for its railroad acroSS 10 acres of land owned by
appellee Martin Flaherty, who took the summons to Thomas W. Prindeville, an
attorney, and employed him to look into the matter and make defense. The
attorney ...
Side 80
RAILROADS – KILLING STOCK – RIGHT OF WAY—FAILURE TO FENCE—
COMPLAINT. In an action against a railway for the death of plaintiff's cow, plaintiff
alleged that the grantor of plaintiff's lessor contracted to convey a right of way to
the ...
RAILROADS – KILLING STOCK – RIGHT OF WAY—FAILURE TO FENCE—
COMPLAINT. In an action against a railway for the death of plaintiff's cow, plaintiff
alleged that the grantor of plaintiff's lessor contracted to convey a right of way to
the ...
Side 83
Elliott, in his work on Railroads (section 1188) says: “Where a railway company
obtains a right of Way through a farm, ... 347, 1 C. C. A. 286, where damages
were sought for cattle killed, it was held that “when a railroad company enters into
a ...
Elliott, in his work on Railroads (section 1188) says: “Where a railway company
obtains a right of Way through a farm, ... 347, 1 C. C. A. 286, where damages
were sought for cattle killed, it was held that “when a railroad company enters into
a ...
Side 84
That the duty which the railroad company owed arose by contract, did not make
the rule for the assessment of damages different from what it would have been if
the duty to fence had been imposed by statute.” In Toledo, etc., R. R. Co. v.
That the duty which the railroad company owed arose by contract, did not make
the rule for the assessment of damages different from what it would have been if
the duty to fence had been imposed by statute.” In Toledo, etc., R. R. Co. v.
Side 85
Said railroad company accepted Said deed and took possession of an 80-foot
Strip of land off of the South end of said 98-acre tract, and constructed a railroad,
and baVe ever Since maintained a railroad thereon. On March 8, 1899, Kiley, ...
Said railroad company accepted Said deed and took possession of an 80-foot
Strip of land off of the South end of said 98-acre tract, and constructed a railroad,
and baVe ever Since maintained a railroad thereon. On March 8, 1899, Kiley, ...
Hva folk mener - Skriv en omtale
Vi har ikke funnet noen omtaler på noen av de vanlige stedene.
Andre utgaver - Vis alle
Vanlige uttrykk og setninger
action affirmed agreed alleged amount answer appellant appellee applied assessment authority Bank bill bonds cause Cent charge circuit claim complaint condition Constitution construction contract corporation court damages death deed defendant determine directed duty easements effect election entered error evidence exceptions execution existing facts filed finding follows further give given grant ground held improvement injury instruction intended interest issue Judge judgment jury land lien limitations Mass matter means ment mortgage motion negligence Ohio operation opinion owner paid parties passed payment person petition plaintiff present proceedings purchase question railroad reason received record reference refused reversed rule statute street sufficient sustained taken thereof tion trial trust witness