Michellod v. Oregon-Washington R. & N. Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
From "Wallowa: John W. Knowles, Judge. In Banc. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. Tbe substance of tbe complaint against tbe defendant, a common carrier, is tbat about January 11, 1916, at La Grande, Oregon, in consideration of tbe payment to it of the ordinary freight charges, the defendant agreed to carry from that place to Joseph, Oregon, and there deliver to the plaintiff 15 barrels of quarts and 25 barrels of pints of bottled temperance beverage of the value of $500,…
Read the full summary
From "Wallowa: John W. Knowles, Judge. In Banc. Statement by Mr. Justice Burnett. Tbe substance of tbe complaint against tbe defendant, a common carrier, is tbat about January 11, 1916, at La Grande, Oregon, in consideration of tbe payment to it of the ordinary freight charges, the defendant agreed to carry from that place to Joseph, Oregon, and there deliver to the plaintiff 15 barrels of quarts and 25 barrels of pints of bottled temperance beverage of the value of $500, which the plaintiff then and there delivered to the defendant who received the same for the purposes mentioned, and “that…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett
It seems that the goods in question were part of a carload of the beverage received from a St. Louis concern by IT. Lottes of La Grande and reshipped by him from there to the plaintiff at Joseph. There is evi*334dence to the effect that the goods as they arrived at La Grande consisted of bottles of the drink packed in barrels which, in turn, were stowed in an ordinary freight-car in fresh horse manure. At the latter place the car was opened by the consignee who took out forty of the barrels containing the bottled beverage and tendered them in that shape to the plaintiff for shipment, as stated,…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Wolf v. American Express Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1869
- McGraw v. B. & O. R. R. Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1881
- Miller v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Marquette, Houghton & Ontonagon Railroad v. KirkwoodMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
- Philadelphia, Baltimore & Washington Railroad v. DiffendalCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1909
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Clemons Produce Co. v. Denver & Rio Grande RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1920
- Shore v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
- Dye Produce Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1925
- Daniels v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1918
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad v. LarosaIndiana Court of Appeals · 1921