Union Stock Yards Co. of Omaha v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co.

196 U.S. 217 (1905)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
U
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Union Stock Yards Co. of Omaha v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co.

United States Supreme Court
196 U.S. 217 (1905)

Play video

Facts

Union Stock Yards Co. of Omaha (Union) (plaintiff) owned stockyards and adjoining railroad tracks in Omaha, Nebraska. Union's tracks were connected by a transfer track to railroad tracks owned by Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. (railroad) (defendant). The railroad paid Union to switch railroad cars headed for locations in Union's stockyards from the railroad's tracks to Union's tracks. The railroad put the railroad cars on the transfer track, and Union hauled them to their final location. One railroad car placed on the transfer track by the railroad had a defective nut. This condition could have been discovered by Union or the railroad through a reasonable inspection, but both parties negligently failed to inspect the car. When one of Union's employees attempted to switch the railroad car, the defective nut caused the employee to be thrown from the car. The employee sued Union, and Union paid the employee damages for his injuries. Union then brought an action against the railroad seeking indemnification for the damages that Union paid the employee. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit sustained a demurrer to Union's petition and then certified a question to the United States Supreme Court regarding whether the railroad should be required to indemnify Union.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Day, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 806,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Torts

Key Terms