Kansas City & Memphis Railway Co. v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Benton Circuit Court; J. 8. Maples, Judge; 1. The depositions of appellee should have been suppressed. Acts 1905, Act 326, p. 778, § 3; 9 Ark. 62. 2. The verdict is against the law and evidence. The receipt for amount paid is not conclusive under the Hepburn act. The goods were shipped as “vinegar stock,” not pure apple vinegar. No value was fixed in the bill of lading.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Benton Circuit Court; J. 8. Maples, Judge; 1. The depositions of appellee should have been suppressed. Acts 1905, Act 326, p. 778, § 3; 9 Ark. 62. 2. The verdict is against the law and evidence. The receipt for amount paid is not conclusive under the Hepburn act. The goods were shipped as “vinegar stock,” not pure apple vinegar. No value was fixed in the bill of lading. A stipulation in a bill of lading that in case of loss the measure of damages shall be the value at point of shipment instead of destination is void in the absence of consideration therefor. 83 S. W. 333; 48 Ark.…
1Opinion of the CourtWood, J.
The appellee sued the appellant to recover the value of two carloads of vinegar stock, amounting to $1,249.89. The complaint, after alleging the organization of appellant and appellee, and that they were common carriers engaged in interstate commerce, averred that in August, 1910, the appellee received from the American Fruit Product Company, at Rochester, New York, two carloads of vinegar stock to be transported to Rogers, Arkansas, and there to be delivered to the order of the shipper upon surrender of the original bills of lading properly endorsed; that the appellee issued its bills of…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hart v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. CarlSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Riverside MillsSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Railroad Co. v. FraloffSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Magnin v. . DinsmoreNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Burd v. San Antonio Southern Ry. Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1924
- Kansas City & Memphis Railway Co. v. OakleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
- Joest v. Clarendon & Rosedale Packet Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
- Erisman v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- Palmer v. Agwilines, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1941