Furman v. C., R. I. & P. R.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Muscatine District Court. Action to recover tlie value of certain household goods delivered to defendant at Chicago for transportation to Atchison, Kansas, which defendant has failed to deliver to plaintiff, the consignee. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff; defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtBeck, J.
I. The petition alleges that the goods in question were delivered by plaintiff to defendant for transportation under a contract obligating defendant to deliver them to plaintiff at Atchison, Kansas, and that defendant has failed to deliver the goods which have been lost to plaintiff. The answer admits the receipt of thegoods and alleges that they were seized while in defendant’s depot at Chicago, upon an attachment issued in an action against George M. Eurman, the husband of plaintiff, and subsequently sold upon legal process, of which plaintiff had full notice long prior to the sale. It is…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hiskey v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1875
- Boyer v. RileySupreme Court of Iowa · 1875
3Cited by5 opinions
- Robinson v. Memphis & C. R.United States Circuit Court · 1883
- Furman v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific R'y Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1885
- Furman v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- Martorana v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadCity of New York Municipal Court · 1915
- Martorana v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1915