Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

PENALTY-Continued.

PUBLIC POLICY. See LEASE.
of, by passenger held not to pre-'POLICE REGULATIONS. See Ix:
clude recovery of penalty. St.! TERSTATE COMMERCE; SUNDAY.
Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Gill

RAILROAD.
(Ark.), 462.

Authority to build short connect-
Reports; penalty for failure of

ing railroad under act author-
railroad
company to make.

izing formation of railroad com-
Right of private party to sue for!
penalty. Hodge v. Marietta &

panies. National Docks & N.
N. G. R. Co. (N. Car.), 373 n.

J. J. C. R. Co. v. State (N. J.,
The

87.
Speculation in penalties.

“Railroad " and "Railway" as
fact that person went on train

synonymous terms, 57 n.
for sole purpose of accumula-
ting penalties for overcharges, RAILROAD COMMISSIONERS.
does not preclude recovery. St.

Removal of cause. Suit by state
Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Gill

commissioners to enforce regu-
(Ark.), 462.

lations cannot be removed, al.
PERSONAL INJURIES. See DAM- though citizenship is diverse,
AGES.

and federal question is involved.
Surgical examination of injured

Dey 2. Chicago, M. & St.
person. See EVIDENCE.

P. R. Co. (C. C.), 17.
PHYSICIAN.

RATES.
Privileged communications. See Regulation of passenger rates.
EVIDENCE.

See TICKETS AND FARES.
Surgical examination of injured RATIFICATION. See LEASE; PRO-
person. See EVIDENCE.

MOTERS.
POSTAL CLERK. See PASSENGER. RECEIVERS.
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS. Parties to action to try title to
See EVIDENCE.

land; receivers as. San An
PROMOTERS.

tonio & A. P. R. Co. v. Ruby
Contract of promoters. Agree- (Tex.), 205 n.

ment to issue stock to plaintiff. Service of process on authorized
Subsequent forfeiture of char- agents of company. Effect of
ter. Evidence as to power of subsequent appointment of re-
company to procure subscrip- ceiver. Simpson v. East Tenn.,
tions. Stanton o. New York & V. & G. R. Co. (Tenn.), 373 ».
E. R. Co. (Conn.), 390.

REMOVAL OF CAUSE.
liability of corporation on, Action against lessor and lessee
400 n.

of railroad. Removal of cause
with plaintiff to procure right by one defendant. Spangler 7.
of way, ratified by company. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. (c.
Plaintiff entitled to damages if C.), 372 n.
company allows its charter to Condemnation proceedings. Re-
be forfeited, and ratification re- moval to federal court of pro-
lates back to date of execution ceedings in state court to con-
of contract. Stanton v. New demn right of way. Kansas C.

York & E. R. Co. (Conn.), 390. & T. R. Co. v. Interstate L. Co.
Parol evidence held inadmissible (C. C.), 25 n.

to vary terms of contract be. Consolidation of railroad com-
tween defendant and promoters panies of different states. Di.
of corporation, subsequently verse citizenship. Suit against
ratified. Stanton v. New York consolidated company. Paul *.
& E. R. Co. (Conn.), 390.

Baltimore O. & C. R. Co. (C. C.).
PUBLICATION.

372 n.
Order of publication to enforce Jurisdiction of federal court over

rights of stockholders where removed case which could not
members of board are non-resi. originally have been brought in
dents. Cross v. West Virginia that court, 25 n.

C. & P. R. Co. (W. Va.), 381. Railroad commissioners; suit by,
PUBLIC LANDS. See EMINENT Do. to enforce regulations cannot

be removed to United States

MAIN.

REMOVAL OF CAUSE-Continued. SERVICE OF PROCESS-Continued.
court, Dey v. Chicago, M. &

quent appointment of receiver
St. P. R. Co. (C. C.), 17.

Simpson v. East Tenn., V. & G.
REPORTS. See PENALTY.

R. Co. (Tenn.), 373 n.
RESIDENCE. See CORPORATION. Publication; order of, to enforce
RIGHT OF WAY. See CONVEYANCE; rights of stockholders where
EMINENT DOMAIN.

members of board are non-resi-
Contract between railroad com-

dents. Cross v. West Virginia
pany and land owner for right C. & P. R. Co. (W. Va.), 381.
of way. Institution of condem. Regular" ticket agent; service
nation proceedings by land of process on. Defective re-
owner. Temporary injunction. turns. Tallman v. Baltimore &
Harvey v. Kansas, N. & D. R. R. Co. (C. C.), 373 n.
Co. (Kan.), 247 n.

SIDETRACKS. "See CONTRACTS ;
Duration of casement acquired in CONSTRUCTION.

right of way. See EMINENT Do. SLEEPING CARS.
MAIN, Right and title acquired.

Berths. Duty of sleeping car
Ejectment may be maintained company to sell. Sale of whole

against company for roadbed section to one person. Refusal
used without consent or author. of conductor to sell occupied
ity of law. Jacksonville, T. & berth for future use. Searles v.
K. W.R. Co. v. Adams (Fla.), Mann Boudoir C. Co. (C. C.),
206.

420 n.
Grant of right of way.. Agree- Contract between sleeping car
ment to restore highway. See company and railroad company
CONVEYANCE.

construed. Loss of car by fire
Public land ; right of way across. held to be an "accident or cas-

Judicial notice of company's ualty." Chicago, St. L. & N.
right. Map of right of way. O. R. Co. v, Pullman S. C. Co.
McKeoin v, Northern P. R. Co.

(U. S.), 424
(C. C.), 269 n.

Stipulation for exclusive
RULES AND REGULATIONS.

rights to furnish such cars, held
Depot privileges ; grant of, to not to be in restraint of trade.
hackmen. See STATIONS.

Chicago, St. L. & N. 0. R. Co.
Freight trains. Regulation that v. Pullman S. C. Co. (U. S.), 424.
such train cannot be required

Destruction of car by fire.
to stop at platform of station to Liability of railroad company.
take on or put off passengers, Effect of collection of insurance.
held valid. Connell v. Mobile Chicago, St. L. & N. O. R. Co.
& O. R. Co. (Miss.), 461 n.

v. Pullman S. C. Co. (U. S.),
— rule forbidding that such 424.
trains shall receive passengers Destruction of car by fire while in
at some other place than station exclusive possession of sleeping
or platform, is reasonable. car company:

Railroad com-
Browne v. Raleigh & G. R. Co. pany not liable under terms of
(N. Car.), 544

contract. Chicago, St. L. & N.
Passenger. Rule forbidding pas- 0. R. Co. v. Pullman S. C. Co.

senger !o stand on platform (U. S.), 424.
while car is in motion, is rea-

in railroad company's yard.
sonable. McCauley v. Tennes- Railroad company held liable
see C., I. & R. Co. (Ala.), 580.

under terms of contract. Chi.
Rule forbidding trains to pass cago, St. L. & N. O R. Co. v.

between station and another Pullman S. C. Co. (U. S.), 424.
train discharging passengers ;

Husband and wife each contract-
evidence as to, in action for in- ing for a berth, may be refused
jury to passenger run over at permission to occupy but one of
station. Lake Shore & M. S. them. Pullman P. C. Co. v.
R. Co. v. Ward (I11.), 533 n.

Balles (Tex.), 416.
SERVICE OF PROCESS.

-- have right to occupy same
Authorized agents; service of berth. Pullman P. C. Co. v.
process on
Effect of subse-

Balles (Tex.), 416.
47 A. & E. R. Cas.—46

SLEEPING CARS—Continued. STATIONS-Continued.

Loss of passenger's valuables. ness liable to landowner for

Company is liable if it fails to rental value. Lyon v. McDon-
have employe continually on ald (Tex.), 217.
duty in car. Carpenter v. New Condemnation of land for union
York, N, H. & H.R. Co. (N. Y.), depot. See EMINENT DOMAIN.
421.

Defective platform. Opinion evi-
Loss or theft of passenger's ef- dence inadmissible on question

fects. Liability of sleeping car whether platform is dangerous
company, 423 n.

to passengers. Graham 3.
Torts of servants. Liability of Pennsylvania Co. (Pa.), 522.

sleeping car company for act of Depot privileges. Company can-
porter or conductor in discharg- not grant exclusive privileges
ing passengers at place not a to one hack and bus company
station. Pullman P. Car Co. v. to exclusion of others. Kala.
Smith (Tex.). 420 n.

mazoo H. & B. Co. v. Sootsma
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE.

(Mich.), 445.
Contract to make up deficiency in Right of railroad companies to

net earnings ; equity held to regulate the use of station
have no jurisdiction to enforce, grounds of hack and omoibus
on ground that accounting was men, 450 n.
necessary. Bradford, E. & C. Failure of company to provide
R. Co. v. New York, L. E. & platform or lights at station, or
W. R. Co. (N. Y.), 374.

to render passengers assistance.
Contract to make up deficiency in Alexandria & F. R. Co. v.

net earnings ; unforeseen in- Herndon (Va.), 529 n.
solvency of company sufficient Passengers run over at stations.
reason for denying specific per.

See PASSENGERS.
formance. Bradford, E. & C. Platform. Company does its
R. Co. v. New York, L. E. & duty, when it provides platform
W. R. Co. (N. Y.), 374.

that may be used without dan-
Contract to make up deficiency in ger by passengers. Graham v.

net earnings of another com- Pennsylvania Co. (Pa.), 522.
pany to pay interest, not spe.

- at station constructed by ho-
cifically enforced where obliga- tel proprietor. Liability of pro-
tion to repay such advances prietor and railroad company
would arise on demand. Brad. for injury to passenger. Wat.
ford, E. & C. R. Co. v. New son v. Oxanna L. Co. (Ala.),
York, L. E. & W. R. Co. (N. Y.),
374.

Evidence as to similar acci.
Lease of trackage rights. Specific dents in other stations, in ac-

performance of contracten. tion for injuries caused by de.
forced in court of equity, rental fective platform. Brady 3.
not being inadequate and effect Manhattan R. Co. (N. Y.), 528 t.
of contract not being to permit - Injury to person going from
disastrous competition. Chi. car upon. Two exits from car;
cago, R. I. & P. Ř. Co. v. United one safe and the other unsafe.
Pac. R. Co. (Neb.), 340.

Missouri P. R. Co. v. Long
Specific performance of contracts (Tex.), 530 n.
with railroad companies, 358 n.

passenger falling off. Going
STATIONS.

from depot in unusual direction.
Condemnation of land for depot Unsafe passageway. Absence
ground, company does not take

of light. Texas & P. R. Co. v.
a fee but only an easement. Brown (Tex.), 530 n.
Lyon v..McDonald (Tex.), 217.

want of ordinary care in us-
for station grounds. See ing, is a bar to recovery for in-
EMINENT DOMAIN, Exercise of juries. Graham v. Penasyl.
Right.

vania Co. (Pa.), 522.
for station purposes. Com- STATUTES.
pany permitting third party to Title and subject of act. Sec
use premises for private busi. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

530 n.

STOCK AND STOCKHOLDERS. STREET RAILWAYS-Continued.

Conditional sale of stock. Agree. railway. Lockhart v. Craig
ment to elect vendor president.

St. R. Co. (Pa.), 57.
Fraud. Cancellation of agree. Electric railway. Municipal au-
ment. Lealey v. Loveridge thorities may consent to laying
(Md.), 372 n.

of tracks in street, although it
Contract for construction of rail. has been , recently paved by

road by stockholder owning special assessments, and an in.
nearly all the stock. Donoghue ferior pavement will be laid.
v. Indiana & L. M. R. Co. Lockhart v. Craig St. R. Co.
(Mich.), 307 n.

(Pa.), 57
Election of directors. Cumulative Mechanic's lien. See that title.
voting. See Officers.

Torts of servants. Liability of
Personal liability of stockholders. company.

See MASTER AND
Claims for labor in construc- SERVANT, PASSENGERS.
tion of road. Sufficiency of com- SUB-CONTRACTOR. See MECHANIC's
plaint. Toner v. Ferguson

LIENS.
(Ind.), 372 n.

SUBSCRIPTION.
Promoters; contract to issue stock

Bonus offered to railroad com-
in consideration for services.
See PROMOTERS.

pany for extension of road ;
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS.

subscription to. Failure to raise

required amount. Withdrawal
Appropriation of railroad track

of subscription. Buchel v. Lott
lengthwise for highway, 39 n.
Eminent domain. Municipal cor-

(Tex.), 328 n.
poration cannot take for a street SUNDAY.
land used for a railroad track.

Indictment of railroad company
Such proceedings will be en-

for running trains on Sunday,
joined. Seymour v. Jefferson,

16 n.
ville, M. & I. R. Co. (Ind.), 38.

Interstate commerce; state Sun-
Laying out highway across rail-

day laws as a regulation of,
road track; damages to which
company is entitled, 161 n.

statute forbidding running of
Widening street. Damages to be Sunday trains held to be an at-

allowed railroad which has con- tempt to regulate, and therefore
structed embankments and

void. Norfolk & W. R. Co. v.
bridges and carried its track

Com. (Va.), I.
over such street. Kansas City TICKETS AND FARES.
v. Kansas City B. R. Co. (Mo.), Commutation ticket issued to
157.

members of partnership. En-
STREET RAILWAYS.

dorsement of name. Proof of
Electric railway does not impose existence of partnership. Gran-

additional burden on street such ier v. Louisar.a, W. R. R. Co.
as renders compensation to (La.), 481 n.
abutting owners necessary. Evading payment of fare by in-
Lockhart v. Craig St. R. Co. ducing conductor to carry with-
(Pa.), 57.

out charge ; such persons con-
Electric railway in streets not an not claim right of passengers.

additional burden giving abut- McVeety v. St. Paul, M. & M.
ting owners right to compensa-

R. Co. (Minn.), 471.
tion, 64 n.

held to constitute “public
-; injunction will not lie to offense" within meaning of stat-
restrain construction and opera. ute. Dyer v. Placer County
tion of, on the ground that no (Cal.), 471 n.
provision has been made for Excessive passenger charges. Ad-
securing compensation to lot dition of bridge toll. St. Louis
owners. Lockhart v. Craig St. & S. F. R. Co v. Stevenson
R. Co. (Pa.), 57.

(Ark ), 471 n.
Ordinary street railway com- Excursion ticket sold for special
pany held entitled to construct train hired by third party ; sale
and operate electrical street of ticket held to constitute con-

16 n.

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

tract binding on carrier. Eddy tra fare, to pay extra fare and
v. Harris (Tex.), 473.

be carried to destination.
Excursion train under manage- Wardwell v. Chicago, M. & St.

ment of third party ; liability of P. R. Co. (Minn.), 482.
company to passengers travel. Mistake of conductor in collecting
ing on, 476 n.

fare. Right to require pas.
Expulsion of passenger for failure senger to pay additional amount

to pay fare. Right of passenger on discovery of mistake. Ward.
to rely on conductor's statement well v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R.
as to amount he would be re- Co. (Minn.), 482.
quired to pay.
Georgia R. &

of coaductor in collecting in-
B. Co. v. Murden (Ga.), 480 n.

sufficient fare. Waiver of right
Failure to pay fare. Conductor to recover additional amount.

cannot expel passenger where Wardwell v. Chicago, M. & St.
tender is made before train has P. R. Co. (Minn.), 482.
been stopped ; no matter who Overcharge. Voluntary payment
makes such tender. Ham v. Pres- of, held not to preclude recovery
sident, etc., D. & H.C. Co. (Pa.), of statutory penalty. St. Louis
635 n.

& S. F. R. Co. v. Gill (Ark.),
Failure to procure ticket ; expul. 462.

sion of passenger for. Company Regulation of rates. Foreign com-
liable where there was no ticket pany held subject to legislation.
office at station where passenger Reduced passenger fares. St.
got on. Eddy v. Rider (Tex.), Louis & S. F. R. Co. 7. Gill
634 n.

(Ark.,, 462.
Failure to produce ticket or pay justice of, must be deter-

fare. Expulsion of passenger, mined by effect on net earnings
610 n.

of entire line, and not by effect
- or pay fare. Passenger may on given subdivision. St. Louis
be expelled, although he has & S. F. R. Co. v. Gill (Ark.),
paid his fare to his destination 462.
to another conductor, who in-

Reasonableness and justice
formed him he could stop over. of statutory regulation, 471 ..
Peabody v. Oregon R. & N. Co.

The fact that railroad is made
(Or.), 598.

post and military route and has
Mistake by agent in selling ticket been granted right of way by

to wrong destination. Ejection general govero ment, does not
of passenger. Damages. Geor. give immunity from. St. Louis
gia R. & B. Co. v. Murden & S. F. R. Co. v. Gill (Ark.),
(Ga.), 480 n.

of conductor as to station in. Round trip tickets." Detachment
dicated, is no excuse for wrong. of wrong coupon by conductor,
ful expulsion of passenger 479 n.
Georgia R. & B. Co. v. Eskew Mistake of conductor in returning
(Ga.), 635.

wrong coupon to passenger.
of conductor in collecting in. Company held liable for expul.
sufficient fare. Expulsion of sion of passenger on return
passenger without first return. trip. Kansas City. M. & B. R.
ing amount paid. Wardwell v. Co. v. Riley (Miss.), 476.
Chicago & St. P. R. Co. (Minn.),

Return coupon ; validity of,
482.

in hands of purchaser from orig.
of conductor in collecting in- inal holder. Hoffman 7. North-
sufficient fare. Retaining ern P. R. Co. (Minn.), 476 n.
amount of fare to station

Scalper's ticket conditioned to be
which passenger was expelled. void if transferred. Right to
Wardwell v. Chicago, M. & St. collect fare. Drummond
P. R. Co. (Mian.), 482.

Southern P, R. Co. (Utah),
of conductor in collecting in- 480 n.
sufficient fare. Right of pas- Speculation in penalties. The
senger after refusing to pay ex- fact that person went on train

462.

at

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »