Materials supplied to contractors for the construction of rail- roads, 688.
Physical examination of plaintiff's person in actions for personal injuries, 414 n.
Street railways; mechanic's lien Removal of Causes.
Oaths. See EMINENT DOMAIN. Passengers.
Assaults on passengers by fellow passengers and strangers. bility of carrier, 651. Contributory negligence of pas- senger in alighting from mov- ing train, 563. Contributory negligence of pas- sengers riding in baggage, mail, and freight cars, 592. Damages. Excessive damages for wrongful expulsion of pas- senger. What verdicts have been sustained, and what set aside, 643. Exemplary damages for injuries to passenger, caused by defect- ive track, 512.
Tortious acts of servants; liabili- ty of carrier for injury to pas- sengers through, 648.
Condemnation proceedings. Re-
moval to federal court of pro- ceedings in state court to con- demn right of way, 25. Streets and Highways.
Laying out highway across rail- road track. Damages to which company is entitled, 161. Street Railways.
Mechanic's lien upon street rail- ways, 290.
Electric railway in streets not an additional burden giving abut- ting owners right to compensa- tion, 64.
Interstate commerce; state Sun- day laws as a regulation of, 16. Tickets and Fares.
"Round trip tickets." Detach- ment of wrong coupon by con- ductor, 470.
NOTE.-The mode of citing the American and English Railroad Cases is as follows:
This index contains references to both the decisions and the notes.
ABANDONMENT.
Condemnation proceedings; aban- donment of. See EMINENT Do- MAIN, Procedure.
ACCOUNTING. See EQUITY. ACT OF GOD.
Landslide in a cut, caused by or- dinary fall of rain, is not an "act of God." Gleeson v. Vir- ginia M. R. Co. (U. S.), 513. What constitutes an "act of God," 520 n.
Action for damages against rail- road companies not bona fide. Entrapping company into ex- cuse for bringing suit, 471 n. ADVERSE POSSESSION.
Consolidated company acquired title by adverse possession to right of way of one of original companies whose existence was limited to fifty years. Miner v.
New York C. & H. R. R. Co. (N. Y.), 212. Ejectment against railroad. Ad-
verse possession under color of title. Defective condemnation proceedings. Cogsbill v. Mo- bile & G. R. Co. (Ala.), 211 n. AGENTS. See OFFICERS; SERVICE OF PROCESS.
APPEAL. See EMINENT DOMAIN. ASSAULT. See PASSENGERS. ASSIGNMENT.
Contract for use of tracks. As- signment of right under con- tract. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. Denver & R G. R. Co. (C. C.), 358 n. ATTORNEYS.
Argument of counsel. See TRIAL.
See SLEEPING CARS. Baggage is confined to articles for personal use of passenger on journey, and not articles car- ried for business purposes. Oakes v. Northern P. R. Co. (Or.), 437.
what constitutes baggage, 444 n.
Carrier accepting property as bag- gage, becomes responsible for it as such, 444 n.
is insurer of baggage, same as freight. Oakes v. Northern P. R. Co. (Or.), 437.
is liable for safe delivery of ordinary baggage, and payment of fare includes compensation for carrying it. Oakes v. North- ern P. R. Co. (Or.), 437. Fire; destruction of baggage by, while in warehouse. Neglect of servants to rescue goods. Galveston, H. & S. A. R. Co. v. Smith (Tex.), 445 n.
Injury to baggage. Breaking open trunk. Evidence as to condition of trunk after it had reached plaintiff's home. Davis v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. (Iowa), 444 n.
Limitation of liability for bag- gage ineffectual by statute. Pre- sumption as to law in another state. Davis v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. (Iowa), 444 n. Stage. property or theatrical para- phernalia; carrier permitting passenger to take as baggage, is liable for it as such. Oakes v. Northern P. R. Co. (Or.), 437.
Valise left in car by passenger. Theft of contents. Liability of company. Bonner v. DeMen-
dose (Tex.), 444 n. Warehouse. Liability of carrier for baggage which passenger has failed to remove. Galves-
ton, H. & S. A. R. Co. v. Smith (Tex.), 444 n.
BRANCH ROADS.
Authority of railroad companies
to construct branch roads, 36 n. Branch from a branch. Branch roads may have in part a com- mon stem leading from the main line. Wheeling B. & T. R. Co. v. Camden C. O. Co. (W. Va.), 27.
Partial construction of road. Com- pany may use and operate any part of main line and branches when completed, the same as though the whole road was fully completed. Wheeling B. & T. R. Co. v. Camden C. O. Co. (W. Va.), 27. Power to construct. Company organized under general law may build branch roads not ex- ceeding 50 miles long. Wheel- ing, B. & T. R. Co. v. Camden C. O. Co. (W. Va.), 27.
afterwards asked for and ob- tained. Farnsworth v. Lime Rock R. Co. (Me.), 64. Amendment of charter is a legis- lative waiver of any forfeiture incurred by failure to construct road and commence business. Farnsworth v. Lime Rock R. Co. (Me.), 64. Consequential damages; consti- tutional provision making rail- roads liable for. Previous charter contract. Exemption from future general legislation. Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Miller (U. S.), 154 n. CHILDREN. See PARENT AND CHILD. Children as passengers. See PASSENGERS.
Condemnation of church property. See EMINENT DOMAIN.
Conveyance of right of way over church land. See CONVEYANCE. CITIZENSHIP. See CORPORATION; REMOVAL OF CAUSES. COLLISION. See PASSENGERS. COMMISSIONERS. See EMINENT DOMAIN, Procedure. COMPETING LINES. See CON-
TRACTS; CONSOLIDATION; LEASE, COMPROMISE.
Contract; compromise is, and to be valid must be perfect in itself. Lampkins. Vicksburg, S. & P. R. Co. (La.), 622.
Law suit which is to be prevented or ended should be especially mentioned in transaction. Lampkins v. Vicksburg, S. & P. R. Co. (La.), 622. CONDEMNATION. DOMAIN. CONSOLIDATION.
Competing lines; acquisition by railroad company of. Construc- tion of Mo. statute. Kimball v. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. (C. C.), 369 n.
operation and control of, by another competing line made illegal by statute. Manchester & L. R. Co. v. Concord R. Co. (N. H.), 359. Illegality of contract of consolida- tion held no defense to a bill for an accounting. Manchester & L. R. Co. v. Concord R. Co. (N. H.), 359.
Removal of cause against consoli-
dated corporation composed of two companies from different states. Paul v. Baltimore, O. & C. R. Co. (C. C.), 372 n. Right of way acquired by one of original companies held not to revert to landowner at expira- tion of such company's charter period. Miner v. New York C. & H. R. R. Co. (N. Y.), 212.
· Consolidated company quired title to right of way of one of constituent companies by right of adverse possession. Miner v. New York C. & H. R. R. Co. (N. Y.), 212. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
Charter contracts. See CHARTER. Jury trial in eminent domain pro- ceedings. See EMINENT Do- MAIN, Procedure.
Eminent Domain. Public use. See EMINENT DOMAIN. Regulation of rates. See TICKETS AND FARES.
Sunday trains; statute forbidding. See SUNDAY.
Statute making railroads subject|
to lien, held not unconstitutional on account of title and subject of act. Kansas City & O. R. Co. v. Frey (Neb.), 295 n. Title of act authorizing incorpo- ration of union depot companies held sufficient to authorize con- ferring right of eminent do- main. Fort St. U. D. Co. v. Morton (Mich.), 41.
statute authorizing union depot company to run local trains, held warranted by pro- vision in title. Fort St. U. D. Co. v. Morton (Mich.), 41. CONSTRUCTION. See CONTRACT. Contract to construct railroad in which officers of company are interested. Fraud, 339 n. Director of company owning ma- jority of stock, cannot contract for construction of road. Alle- mong v. Simmons (Ind.), 400. Partial construction of road.
does not apply to road in pro- cess of construction. Macon & A. R. Co. v. Macon & D. R. Co. (Ga.), 315.
Trespass on adjoining land. See TRESPASS.
CONTRACT. See FRAUD.
Competing railroads; contracts between, not necessarily void as against public policy. Ille- gality depends upon circum- stances. Manchester & L. R. Co. v. Concord R. Co. (N. H.), 359. Construction contracts. Finality and effect of engineer's esti- mates, 304 N.
Monthly payments on certifi- cate of engineer. Engineer's action in making certificate held to be a "determination" under contract. Chicago, S. F. & C. R. Co. v. Price, (U. S.), 298.
Contract for construction by director. Corporation held not estopped to deny validity. Al- lemong v. Simmons (Ind.), 400. Construction of railroad; contract for, by stockholders owning nearly all the stock. Donoghue 7. Indiana & L. M. R. Co. (Mich.), 307 n.
Deficiency in net earnings; con- tract to make up. See SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.
Directors; contract of corporation with. Lease of road. See LEASE.
Director of company owning ma- jority of stock, cannot contract for construction of road. Alle- mong v. Simmons (Ind.), 400. Filling trestle. Contractor not entitled to recover for space oc- cupied by culvert. East Tenn., V. & G. R. Co. ບ. Matthews (Ga.), 307 n.
Furnishing ties. Acceptance of check and receipt of bill by con- tractor as per statement. Pro- test against inspection on which account was based. Robinson V. Detroit, L. & N. R. Co. (Mich.), 306.
Admissions of plaintiff as to payment of ties. Estoppel. In- struction held to invade prov- ince of jury. Graffin v. Charles- ton, C. & C. R. Co. (S. Car.), 304.
Furnishing ties. Company ac- cepting ties afterwards alleged to be defective. Jury may as- sume that ties accepted came, up to contract. Burden of. proof. Graffin v. Charleston, C. & C. R. Co. (S. Car.), 304. Grant of right of way. Agree- ment to restore highway. See CONVEYANCE.
Illegality of executed contract be- tween competing lines held no defense to a bill for an account- ing. Manchester & L. R. Co. v. Concord R. Co. (N. H.), 359. Lease of trackage rights. Execu-
tion of contract. See LEASE. Parol claim by contractors to as- sume debts of company. Evi- dence to establish contract. Lookout Mountain R. Co. v. Houston (C. C.), 373 n. Railroad company may let out to contractor work of replacing bridge. Bibb's Adm'r v. Nor- folk & W. R. Co. (Va.), 651. Restoration of highway in consid- eration of grant of right of way. Damages for failure of company to keep agreement heid not ex- cessive. Post. v. West Shore & B. R. Co. (N. Y.), 322. Right of way, contract for. See RIGHT OF WAY.
CONTRACTORS—Continued. Independent contractor. Con- struction of railroad. Connec- tion of company with injury caused by excavations Ala- bama M. R. Co. v. Coskry (Ala.), 315 n.
Creation of nuisance; rail- road company not liable, al- though its superintendent di- rected the placing of a soil pipe. Atlanta & F. R. Co. v. Kim- berly (Ga.), 307.
employe of, working on bridge held not to be servant of railroad company. Contractor alone liable for his injury. Bibb's Adm'r v. Norfolk & W. R. Co. (Va.), 652.
liability of railroad compa- nies for torts of, 315 m.
Nuisance created by, consist- ing of pond and accumulation of filth. Company not liable for. Atlanta & F. R. Co. Kimberly (Ga.), 307.
Railroad company not lia- ble for negligence of foreman of, in signaling train to cross unsafe bridge, causing injury to contractor's workman. Bibb's Adm'r v. Norfolk & W. R. Co. (Va.), 651.
Who are, 686 n. Material men and laborers must be paid in money, no matter what was contract between con- tractor and principal. Farmers' L. & T. Co. v. Canada & St. L. R. Co. (Ind.), 271.
Parol claim by contractors to as- sume debts of company. Evi- dence to establish contract. Lookout Mountain R. Co. v. Houston (C. C.), 373 n. Sub-contractor must accept pay- ment as provided in contract. If tender of proper article is not made him he may sue for mon- ey. Farmers' L. & T. Co. v. Canada & St. L. R. Co. (Ind.), 271.
who is, within meaning of mechanic's lien law. Farmers' L. & T. Co. v. Canada & St. L. R. Co. (Ind.), 271. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE. See PASSENGERS.
Pleading. Where petition states facts showing that plaintiff was negligent, the question of con-
« AnteriorContinuar » |