Legal Opinion
Church v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.
Nebraska Supreme Court
Decided May 7, 1908No. 15,167PublishedCited by 9 opinions
Appeal from the district court for Red Willow county: Robert 0. Orr, Judge.
1Opinion of the Court
Good, 0.
In March, 1901, Henry T. Church contracted with the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Company to transport for him from McCook, Nebraska, to Menominee Palls, Wisconsin, a car-load of horses and mules. The contract of shipment did not require Church to furnish an attendant or caretaker. The horses and mules were delivered to the railway company in good condition, and when the car was received at its destination one mule was missing. Church was unable to obtain any information as to what had become of the missing mule. He brought this action against the railway company, setting up…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- South & North Alabama Railroad v. HenleinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1875
- Coupland v. Housatonic R. R. Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1892
- State ex rel. Oakland Cemetery Ass'n v. City of St. PaulSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. WittyNebraska Supreme Court · 1891
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co. v. SlatteryNebraska Supreme Court · 1906
3Cited by9 opinions
- Nye-Schneider-Fowler Co. v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1920
- Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. Timberlake, Currie & Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1927
- Davis v. Sullivan OpryTexas Commission of Appeals · 1924
- Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. NevilleCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925
- Nashville v. JohnsonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1914
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.