T. Richter & Sons v. American Express Co.
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Scott District Court. — William Ti-ieopi-iilus, Judge. Action brought by the owner'of a package of furs, against both defendants as common carriers. It was an interstate shipment. The goods were lost in transit and never delivered to the consignee. The action is in trover to recover the value for conversion.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Scott District Court. — William Ti-ieopi-iilus, Judge. Action brought by the owner'of a package of furs, against both defendants as common carriers. It was an interstate shipment. The goods were lost in transit and never delivered to the consignee. The action is in trover to recover the value for conversion. The contract of carriage, by its express terms,- — -and appellant contends by the law then in force, — limited the recovery to $50. The goods were worth more, and plaintiff sues for their actual value. Trial to a jury 'resulted in a verdict for plaintiff against the defendant…
1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.
terstatessbip^" £gnt!iabu5y: earrio\”°ef-by ÍCCt. The plaintiff’s claim is substantially this: That it is an Iowa corporation; that each defendant is a common carrier; that defendant American Express Company had a continuous line for the carriage of goods from Brooklyn, New York, to Davenport, Iowa; that both defendants have a line to Davenport; that, some two or three weeks before December 19, 1913, plaintiff sent a package of furs to gchiff Bros., at Brooklyn, New York, to be tanned or dressed, and that, on said December 19th, plaintiff, by its agents, Schiff Bros., delivered said package…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Adams Express Company v. CroningerSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Georgia, Florida & Alabama Railway Co. v. Blish Milling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Hart v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. CarlSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ward v. Gulf, M. N.R. Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1938
- Ruebel Bros. v. American Express Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1920
- Midland Linseed Co. v. American Liquid Fireproofing Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- Tuller v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- Murphy v. Southern Iowa RouteSupreme Court of Iowa · 1944