Engineering - Judgment Search Results

Railway Engineering Equipment Company Vs. Oregon Short

Court: US Supreme Court

..... company v oregon short 296 u s 658 1936 296 u s 658 railway engineering equipment company et al petitioners v oregon short line railroad company no 631 supreme court ..... the tenth circuit denied rehearing denied 297 u s 727 56 s ct 497 railway engineering equipment company v oregon short 296 u s 658 1936

Khodadad Mundegar Vs. Bai Jerbai

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1937)39BOMLR1156

engineer j 1 the claim in the suit is an extraordinary one the plaintiffs pray for .....

Purshottam Balvant Gole Vs. the Secretary of State for India

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1937)39BOMLR1152; 173Ind.Cas.522

engineer j 1 plaintiff no 1 is a pleader at akola and plaintiff no 2 is .....

Khodadad Mundegar and anr. Vs. Bai Jerbai and ors.

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR1938Bom6

engineer j 1 the claim in the suit is an extraordinary one the plaintiffs pray for .....

Purshottam Balvant Gole and anr. Vs. Secretary of State

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: AIR1938Bom93

engineer j 1 plaintiff 1 is a pleader at akola and plaintiff 2 is his wife .....

Municipal Board Vs. Babu Ram Lal

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: AIR1936All723; 165Ind.Cas.439

..... municipal board through defendants 2 and 3 that is the municipal engineer and the overseer it was not definitely pleaded in the ..... the contractor performing all works that are ordered by the municipal engineer and the argument is that there ought to be a ..... sub overseer was acting for his superior officer the district board engineer and it would certainly be inequitable if a contractor should suffer .....

Chicago Great Western R. Co. Vs. Rambo

Court: US Supreme Court

..... inspection act most persuasive of this is the testimony of the engineer himself who testified that he was watching the straight track ..... the track 800 feet ahead otherwise it is said the engineer would have seen the speeder at that distance and applied ..... change position on the speeder he received no warning further the engineer s statements must be considered in connection with the circumstances .....

St. Joseph Stock Yards Co. Vs. United States

Court: US Supreme Court

..... to 597 570 that was close to the estimate of the government s engineer appellant s engineer testified that the present condition was 89 percent appellant s contention is that ..... this included construction overheads general salaries and expenses legal expenses compensation of architects and engineers fire and tornado insurance workmen s compensation and public liability insurance and taxes during .....

Adhar Chandra Mondal Vs. Dolgobinda Das and ors.

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: AIR1936Cal663

..... rights ex contractu arises as was explained by jessel m r in empress engineering co in re 1881 16 ch d 125 from the fact that an ..... this connection i would refer to the well known case in re empress engineering co 5 in the judgment of sir george jessel m r the ..... s observations in touche s case 8 were considered in in re empress engineering co 5 in that case jones and pride were solicitors who claimed in .....

The Arizona Vs. Anelich

Court: US Supreme Court

..... the winch one was by the operation of a lever located between decks near the engine which controlled the clutch on the main shaft the other was by a lever located ..... the use of the brace and the consequent delay in stopping the winch from the engine room when the alarm was given was the proximate cause of the injury and death .....