Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

PENALTY-Continued.

of, by passenger held not to pre-
clude recovery of penalty. St.
Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Gill
(Ark.), 462.
Reports; penalty for failure of
railroad company
to make.'

Right of private party to sue for
penalty. Hodge v. Marietta &
N. G. R. Co. (N. Car.), 373 n.
Speculation in penalties.

The
fact that person went on train
for sole purpose of accumula-
ting penalties for overcharges,
does not preclude recovery. St.
Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Gill
(Ark.), 462.

PERSONAL INJURIES.

AGES.

See DAM-

[blocks in formation]

400 1.

with plaintiff to procure right
of way, ratified by company.
Plaintiff entitled to damages if
company allows its charter to
be forfeited, and ratification re-
lates back to date of execution
of contract. Stanton v. New
York & E. R. Co. (Conn.), 390.
Parol evidence held inadmissible
to vary terms of contract be-
tween defendant and promoters
of corporation, subsequently
ratified. Stanton v. New York
& E. R. Co. (Conn.), 390.
PUBLICATION.

Order of publication to enforce
rights of stockholders where
members of board are non-resi-
dents. Cross v. West Virginia
C. & P. R. Co. (W. Va.), 381.
PUBLIC LANDS. See EMINENT Do-

MAIN.

PUBLIC POLICY. See Lease.
POLICE REGULATIONS. See Is-
TERSTATE COMMERCE; SUNDAY.

RAILROAD.

Authority to build short connect-
ing railroad under act author-
izing formation of railroad com-
panies. National Docks & N.
J. J. C. R. Co. v. State (N. J.),
87.
"Railroad" and "Railway" as
synonymous terms, 57 n.
RAILROAD COMMISSIONERS.
Removal of cause. Suit by state
commissioners to enforce regu-
lations cannot be removed, ai-
though citizenship is diverse,
and federal question is involved.
Dey v. Chicago, M. & St.
P. R. Co. (C. C.), 17.

RATES.

Regulation of passenger rates.
See TICKETS AND FARES.
See LEASE; PRO-

RATIFICATION.

MOTERS.

RECEIVERS.

Parties to action to try title to
land; receivers as. San An-
tonio & A. P. R. Co. v. Ruby
(Tex.), 205 n.

Service of process on authorized
agents of company. Effect of
subsequent appointment of re-
ceiver. Simpson v. East Tenn.,
V. & G. R. Co. (Tenn.), 373 ".
REMOVAL OF CAUSE.
Action against lessor and lessee

of railroad. Removal of cause
by one defendant. Spangler 2.
Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. (C.
C.), 372 n.
Condemnation proceedings. Re-
moval to federal court of pro-
ceedings in state court to con-
demn right of way. Kansas C.
& T. R. Co. v. Interstate L. Co.
(C. C.), 25 n.
Consolidation of railroad com-
panies of different states. Di-
verse citizenship. Suit against
consolidated company. Paul.
Baltimore O. & C. R. Co. (C. C.),
372 n.

Jurisdiction of federal court over
removed case which could not
originally have been brought in
that court, 25 n.
Railroad commissioners; suit by,
to enforce regulations cannot
be removed to United States

REMOVAL OF CAUSE-Continued.

court. Dey v. Chicago, M. &
St. P. R. Co. (C. C.), 17.

REPORTS. See PENALTY.
RESIDENCE. See CORPORATION.
RIGHT OF WAY. See CONVEYANCE;
EMINENT DOMAIN.

Contract between railroad com-
pany and land owner for right
of way. Institution of condem-
nation proceedings by land
owner. Temporary injunction.
Harvey v. Kansas, N. & D. R.
Co. (Kan.), 247 ".

Duration of easement acquired in
right of way. See EMINENT Do-
MAIN, Right and title acquired.
Ejectment may be maintained
against company for roadbed
used without consent or author-
ity of law. Jacksonville, T. &
K. W. R. Co. v. Adams (Fla.),
206.

Grant of right of way.. Agree-
ment to restore highway. See
CONVEYANCE.

Public land; right of way across.
Judicial notice of company's
right. Map of right of way.
McKeoin v. Northern P. R. Co.
(C. C.), 269 n.

RULES AND REGULATIONS.
Depot privileges; grant of, to
hackmen. See STATIONS.
Freight trains. Regulation that
such train cannot be required
to stop at platform of station to
take on or put off passengers,
held valid. Connell v. Mobile
& O. R. Co. (Miss.), 461 n.

rule forbidding that such
trains shall receive passengers
at some other place than station
or platform, is reasonable.
Browne v. Raleigh & G. R. Co.
(N. Car.), 544.

Passenger. Rule forbidding pas-
senger to stand on platform
while car is in motion, is rea-
sonable. McCauley v. Tennes-
see C., I. & R. Co. (Ala.), 580.
Rule forbidding trains to pass
between station and another
train discharging passengers;
evidence as to, in action for in-
jury to passenger run over at
station. Lake Shore & M. S.
R. Co. v. Ward (Ill.), 533 n.
SERVICE OF PROCESS.

Authorized agents; service of
process on. Effect of subse-)
47 A. & E. R. Cas.-46

SERVICE OF PROCESS-Continued.
quent appointment of receiver
Simpson v. East Tenn., V. & G.
R. Co. (Tenn.), 373 n.
Publication; order of, to enforce
rights of stockholders where
members of board are non-resi-
dents. Cross v. West Virginia
C. & P. R. Co. (W. Va.), 381.
Regular" ticket agent; service
of process on. Defective re-
turns. Tallman v. Baltimore &
R. Co. (C. C.), 373 n.
SIDETRACKS. See CONTRACTS;

44

CONSTRUCTION.

SLEEPING CARS.

Berths. Duty of sleeping car
company to sell. Sale of whole
section to one person. Refusal
of conductor to sell occupied
berth for future use. Searles v.
Mann Boudoir C. Co. (C. C.),
420 n.

Contract between sleeping car
company and railroad company
construed. Loss of car by fire
held to be an "accident or cas-
ualty." Chicago, St. L. & N.
O. R. Co. v. Pullman S. C. Co.
(U. S.), 424.

Stipulation for exclusive
rights to furnish such cars, held
not to be in restraint of trade.
Chicago, St. L. & N. O. R. Co.
v. Pullman S. C. Co. (U. S.), 424.

Destruction of car by fire.
Liability of railroad company.
Effect of collection of insurance.
Chicago, St. L. & N. O. R. Co.
v. Pullman S. C. Co. (U. S.),
424.
Destruction of car by fire while in
exclusive possession of sleeping
car company. Railroad com-
pany not liable under terms of
contract. Chicago, St. L. & N.
O. R. Co. v. Pullman S. C. Co.
(U. S.), 424.

in railroad company's yard.
Railroad company held liable
under terms of contract. Chi-
cago, St. L. & N. O R. Co. v.

Pullman S. C. Co. (U. S.), 424.
Husband and wife each contract-
ing for a berth, may be refused
permission to occupy but one of
them. Pullman P. C. Co. v.
Balles (Tex.), 416.

have right to occupy same
berth. Pullman P. C. Co. v.
Balles (Tex.), 416.

SLEEPING CARS-Continued.
Loss of passenger's valuables.
Company is liable if it fails to
have employe continually on
duty in car. Carpenter v. New
York, N. H. & H. R. Co. (N. Y.),
421.

Loss or theft of passenger's ef-
fects. Liability of sleeping car
company, 423 n.

Torts of servants. Liability of
sleeping car company for act of
porter or conductor in discharg-
ing passengers at place not a
station. Pullman P. Car Co. v.
Smith (Tex.), 420 n.
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.
Contract to make up deficiency in
net earnings; equity held to
have no jurisdiction to enforce,
on ground that accounting was
necessary. Bradford, E. & C.
R. Co. v. New York, L. E. &
W. R. Co. (N. Y.), 374.
Contract to make up deficiency in

net earnings; unforeseen in-
solvency of company sufficient
reason for denying specific per-
formance. Bradford, E. & C.
R. Co. v. New York, L. E. &
W. R. Co. (N. Y.), 374.
Contract to make up deficiency in
net earnings of another com-
pany to pay interest, not spe-
cifically enforced where obliga-
tion to repay such advances
would arise on demand. Brad-
ford, E. & C. R. Co. v. New
York, L. E. & W. R. Co. (N. Y.),
374.

en-

Lease of trackage rights. Specific
performance of contract
forced in court of equity, rental
not being inadequate and effect
of contract not being to permit
disastrous competition. Chi-
cago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. United
Pac. R. Co. (Neb.), 340.
Specific performance of contracts
with railroad companies, 358 n.
STATIONS.

Condemnation of land for depot
ground, company does not take
a fee but only an easement.
Lyon v. McDonald (Tex.), 217.

for station grounds. See
EMINENT DOMAIN, Exercise of
Right.

for station purposes. Com-
pany permitting third party to
use premises for private busi-

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

men, 450 n.

Failure of company to provide
platform or lights at station, or
to render passengers assistance.
Alexandria & F. R. Co. v.
Herndon (Va.), 529 n.
Passengers run over at stations.
See PASSENGers.
Platform. Company does its
duty, when it provides platform
that may be used without dan-
ger by passengers. Graham v.
Pennsylvania Co. (Pa.), 522.

at station constructed by ho-
tel proprietor. Liability of pro-
prietor and railroad company
for injury to passenger. Wat-
son v. Oxanna L. Co. (Ala.),
530 n.

Evidence as to similar acci-
dents in other stations, in ac-
tion for injuries caused by de-
fective platform. Brady v.
Manhattan R. Co. (N. Y.), 528 #.

Injury to person going from
car upon. Two exits from car;
one safe and the other unsafe.
Missouri P. R. Co. v. Long
(Tex.), 530 n.

passenger falling off. Going
from depot in unusual direction.
Unsafe passageway. Absence
of light. Texas & P. R. Co. v.
Brown (Tex.), 530 n.

want of ordinary care in us-
ing, is a bar to recovery for in-
juries. Graham v. Pennsyl
vania Co. (Pa.), 522.

STATUTES.

[blocks in formation]

STOCK AND STOCKHOLDERS.
Conditional sale of stock.

Agree-
ment to elect vendor president.
Fraud. Cancellation of agree-
ment. Lealey v. Loveridge
(Md.), 372 n

Contract for construction of rail-
road by stockholder owning
nearly all the stock. Donoghue

v. Indiana & L. M. R. Co.
(Mich.), 307 n.

Election of directors. Cumulative
voting. See OFFICERS.

Personal liability of stockholders.

Claims for labor in construc-
tion of road. Sufficiency of com-
plaint. Toner v. Ferguson

(Ind.), 372 n.
Promoters; contract to issue stock
in consideration for services.
See PROMOTERS.

STREETS AND HIGHWAYS.
Appropriation of railroad track
lengthwise for highway, 39 n.
Eminent domain. Municipal cor-
poration cannot take for a street
land used for a railroad track.
Such proceedings will be en-
joined. Seymour v. Jefferson,
ville, M. & I. R. Co. (Ind.), 38.
Laying out highway across rail-
road track; damages to which
company is entitled, 161 n.
Widening street. Damages to be
allowed railroad which has con-
structed embankments and
bridges and carried its track
over such street. Kansas City
v. Kansas City B. R. Co. (Mo.),
157.

STREET RAILWAYS.

Electric railway does not impose
additional burden on street such
as renders compensation to
abutting owners necessary.
Lockhart v. Craig St. R. Co.
(Pa.), 57.

Electric railway in streets not an
additional burden giving abut-
ting owners right to compensa-
tion, 64 n.

; injunction will not lie to
restrain construction and opera-
tion of, on the ground that no
provision has been made for
securing compensation to lot
owners. Lockhart v. Craig St.
R. Co. (Pa.), 57.

Ordinary street railway com-
pany held entitled to construct
and operate electrical street

[blocks in formation]

existence of partnership. Gran-
ier v. Louisana, W. R. R. Co.
(La.), 481 n.

Evading payment of fare by in-

ducing conductor to carry with-
out charge; such persons con-
not claim right of passengers.
McVeety v. St. Paul, M. & M.
R. Co. (Minn.), 471.

held to constitute "public
offense" within meaning of stat-
ute. Dyer v. Placer County
(Cal.), 471 n.

Excessive passenger charges. Ad-
dition of bridge toll. St. Louis
& S. F. R. Co. v. Stevenson
(Ark ), 471 n.
Excursion ticket sold for special
train hired by third party; sale
of ticket held to constitute con-

TICKETS AND FARES-Continued. | TICKETS AND FARES-Continued.

I

tract binding on carrier.

Eddy

v. Harris (Tex.), 473.
Excursion train under manage-
ment of third party; liability of
company to passengers travel-
ing on, 476 n.

Expulsion of passenger for failure
to pay fare. Right of passenger
to rely on conductor's statement
as to amount he would be re-
quired to pay. Georgia R. &
B. Co. v. Murden (Ga.), 480 n.
Failure to pay fare. Conductor
cannot expel passenger where
tender is made before train has
been stopped; no matter who
makes such tender. Ham v. Pres-
sident, etc., D. & H. C. Co. (Pa.),
635 n.

Failure to procure ticket; expul-
sion of passenger for. Company
liable where there was no ticket
office at station where passenger
got on. Eddy v. Rider (Tex.),
634 n.

Failure to produce ticket or pay
fare. Expulsion of passenger,
610 n.

or pay fare.

Passenger may

be expelled, although he has
paid his fare to his destination
to another conductor, who in-
formed him he could stop over.
Peabody v. Oregon R, & N. Co.
(Or.), 598.

Mistake by agent in selling ticket
to wrong destination. Ejection
of passenger. Damages. Geor-
gia R. & B. Co. v. Murden
(Ga.), 480 n.

of conductor as to station in-
dicated, is no excuse for wrong-
ful expulsion of passenger.
Georgia R. & B. Co. v. Eskew
(Ga.), 635.

of conductor in collecting in-
sufficient fare. Expulsion of
passenger without first return-
ing amount paid. Wardwell v.
Chicago & St. P. R. Co. (Minn.),
482.

of conductor in collecting in-
sufficient fare. Retaining
amount of fare to station at
which passenger was expelled.
Wardwell v. Chicago, M. & St.
P. R. Co. (Minn.), 482.

of conductor in collecting in-
sufficient fare. Right of pas-
senger after refusing to pay ex-

to

tra fare, to pay extra fare and
be carried
destination.
Wardwell v. Chicago, M. & St.
P. R. Co. (Minn.), 482.
Mistake of conductor in collecting
fare. Right to require pas-
senger to pay additional amount
on discovery of mistake. Ward-
well v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R.
Co. (Minn.), 482.

of conductor in collecting in-
sufficient fare. Waiver of right

to recover additional amount.
Wardwel! v. Chicago, M. & St.
P. R. Co. (Minn.), 482.
Overcharge. Voluntary payment
of, held not to preclude recovery
of statutory penalty. St. Louis
& S. F. R. Co. v. Gill (Ark.),
462.
Regulation of rates. Foreign com-
pany held subject to legislation.
Reduced passenger fares. St.
Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Gill
(Ark.), 462.

justice of, must be deter-
mined by effect on net earnings
of entire line, and not by effect
on given subdivision. St. Louis
& S. F. R. Co. v. Gill (Ark.),
462.

- Reasonableness and justice
of statutory regulation, 471 #.

The fact that railroad is made
post and military route and has
been granted right of way by
general government, does not
give immunity from. St. Louis
& S. F. R. Co. v. Gill (Ark.),
462.
"Round trip tickets." Detachment
of wrong coupon by conductor,
479 n.
Mistake of conductor in returning

wrong coupon to passenger.
Company held liable for expul-
sion of passenger on return
trip. Kansas City. M. & B. R.
Co. v. Riley (Miss.), 476.

Return coupon; validity of,
in hands of purchaser from orig.
inal holder. Hoffman v. North-
ern P. R. Co. (Minn.), 476 n.
Scalper's ticket conditioned to be
void if transferred. Right to
collect fare. Drummond
Southern P. R. Co. (Utah),
480 n.
Speculation in

penalties. The

fact that person went on train

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »