7 Iowa opinions name it 1 courts 1902–1912 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Gordon v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.green1 sentence1909See Gordon v. Railroad, supra, and cases there cited. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
South Baltimore Car Works v. Schaefer
green
2 sentences1912South Baltimore Car Works v. Schaefer, 96 Md. 88 ( 53 Atl. 665 , 94 Am. 1912South Baltimore Car Works v. Schaefer, 96 Md. 88 ( 53 Atl. 665 , 94 Am. | 1 | 1912–1912 |
Quigley v. . Levering
green
2 sentences1910For authorities in support of the conclusions here announced, see: Wellihan v. National Wheel Co., 128 Mich. 1 ( 87 N. W. 75 ); Bergstrom v. Staples, 82 Mich. 654 ( 46 N. W. 1035 ); Porter v. Silver Creek Co., 84 Wis. 418 ( 54 N. W. 1019 ); Quigley v. Levering, 167 N. Y. 58 ( 60 N. E. 276 , 54 L. 1910For authorities in support of the conclusions here announced, see: Wellihan v. National Wheel Co., 128 Mich. 1 ( 87 N. W. 75 ); Bergstrom v. Staples, 82 Mich. 654 ( 46 N. W. 1035 ); Porter v. Silver Creek Co., 84 Wis. 418 ( 54 N. W. 1019 ); Quigley v. Levering, 167 N. Y. 58 ( 60 N. E. 276 , 54 L. | 1 | 1910–1910 |
Bergstrom v. Staples
green
2 sentences1910For authorities in support of the conclusions here announced, see: Wellihan v. National Wheel Co., 128 Mich. 1 ( 87 N. W. 75 ); Bergstrom v. Staples, 82 Mich. 654 ( 46 N. W. 1035 ); Porter v. Silver Creek Co., 84 Wis. 418 ( 54 N. W. 1019 ); Quigley v. Levering, 167 N. Y. 58 ( 60 N. E. 276 , 54 L. 1910For authorities in support of the conclusions here announced, see: Wellihan v. National Wheel Co., 128 Mich. 1 ( 87 N. W. 75 ); Bergstrom v. Staples, 82 Mich. 654 ( 46 N. W. 1035 ); Porter v. Silver Creek Co., 84 Wis. 418 ( 54 N. W. 1019 ); Quigley v. Levering, 167 N. Y. 58 ( 60 N. E. 276 , 54 L. | 1 | 1910–1910 |
Akeson v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.
green
1 sentence1910Akeson v. Railway, 106 Iowa, 54 . | 1 | 1910–1910 |
Porter v. Silver Creek & Morris Coal Co.
neutral
2 sentences1910For authorities in support of the conclusions here announced, see: Wellihan v. National Wheel Co., 128 Mich. 1 ( 87 N. W. 75 ); Bergstrom v. Staples, 82 Mich. 654 ( 46 N. W. 1035 ); Porter v. Silver Creek Co., 84 Wis. 418 ( 54 N. W. 1019 ); Quigley v. Levering, 167 N. Y. 58 ( 60 N. E. 276 , 54 L. 1910For authorities in support of the conclusions here announced, see: Wellihan v. National Wheel Co., 128 Mich. 1 ( 87 N. W. 75 ); Bergstrom v. Staples, 82 Mich. 654 ( 46 N. W. 1035 ); Porter v. Silver Creek Co., 84 Wis. 418 ( 54 N. W. 1019 ); Quigley v. Levering, 167 N. Y. 58 ( 60 N. E. 276 , 54 L. | 1 | 1910–1910 |
Wellihan v. National Wheel Co.
green
2 sentences1910For authorities in support of the conclusions here announced, see: Wellihan v. National Wheel Co., 128 Mich. 1 ( 87 N. W. 75 ); Bergstrom v. Staples, 82 Mich. 654 ( 46 N. W. 1035 ); Porter v. Silver Creek Co., 84 Wis. 418 ( 54 N. W. 1019 ); Quigley v. Levering, 167 N. Y. 58 ( 60 N. E. 276 , 54 L. 1910For authorities in support of the conclusions here announced, see: Wellihan v. National Wheel Co., 128 Mich. 1 ( 87 N. W. 75 ); Bergstrom v. Staples, 82 Mich. 654 ( 46 N. W. 1035 ); Porter v. Silver Creek Co., 84 Wis. 418 ( 54 N. W. 1019 ); Quigley v. Levering, 167 N. Y. 58 ( 60 N. E. 276 , 54 L. | 1 | 1910–1910 |
Herrick v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.
green
2 sentences1906Thus the courts have upheld statutes depriving railway companies of the benefit of the fellow servant doctrine, Herrick v. Railroad, 31 Minn. 11 ( 16 N. W. 413 , 47 Am. 1906Thus the courts have upheld statutes depriving railway companies of the benefit of the fellow servant doctrine, Herrick v. Railroad, 31 Minn. 11 ( 16 N. W. 413 , 47 Am. | 1 | 1906–1906 |
Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. MacKey
green
2 sentences1906Rep. 771 ); Railroad v. Mackey, 127 U. S. 205 (8 Sup. Ct. 1161, 32 L. 1906Rep. 771 ); Railroad v. Mackey, 127 U. S. 205 (8 Sup. Ct. 1161, 32 L. | 1 | 1906–1906 |
Smith v. Alabama
green
2 sentences1906Smith v. Alabama, 124 U. S. 465 (8 Sup. Ct. 564, 31 L. 1906Smith v. Alabama, 124 U. S. 465 (8 Sup. Ct. 564, 31 L. | 1 | 1906–1906 |
Philo v. Illinois Central R. R.
neutral
1 sentence1902That such damages, in event of death, are recoverable only under the statutes mentioned, appears from Philo v. Railroad Co., 33 Iowa, 47 . — Arrirmrd. | 1 | 1902–1902 |
Troughear v. Lower Vein Coal Co.
neutral
1 sentence1902In the cases of Troughear v. Coal Co., 62 Iowa, 576 , and Fosburg v. Fuel Co., 93 Iowa, 54 , the -trial court instructed that the doctrine of fellow servant applied, and the cases were each brought here on the defendant’s appeal, no objection being made to the rule stated. | 1 | 1902–1902 |
Fosburg v. Phillips Fuel Co.
neutral
1 sentence1902In the cases of Troughear v. Coal Co., 62 Iowa, 576 , and Fosburg v. Fuel Co., 93 Iowa, 54 , the -trial court instructed that the doctrine of fellow servant applied, and the cases were each brought here on the defendant’s appeal, no objection being made to the rule stated. | 1 | 1902–1902 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.