Warning

Info

🏅 UnreasonableWoman, SLS '24 |

0 0

City of Columbus v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.

15 Ohio C.D. 663 (1904)

tl;dr: Plaintiff contracted with Defendant railroads to erect “neat and ornamental” buildings on each side of a newly constructed viaduct to give the impression of a continuous and complete road (hiding cars and depots from view). Defendants mostly refused.

IRACIssue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion

🤯 High points 🤯Key points contributed by students on LSD

Facts & Holding

Facts:Plaintiff contracted with Defendant railroads to erect “neat and ornamental”...

Holding:Reversed. Plaintiff is entitled to specific performance because the terms...

City of Columbus v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.

Chat for City of Columbus v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.
brief-241
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you