Atlantic Refining Co. v. Pennsylvania Railroad
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 284, Jan. T., 1921, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., June T., 1919, No. 2999, on verdict for plaintiff, in case of Atlantic Refining Co. v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co. Assumpsit for loss of goods. Before Shoemaker, J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $2,142.09. De- . fendant appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 284, Jan. T., 1921, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. No. 1, Phila. Co., June T., 1919, No. 2999, on verdict for plaintiff, in case of Atlantic Refining Co. v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co. Assumpsit for loss of goods. Before Shoemaker, J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $2,142.09. De- . fendant appealed. Error assigned, among others, was (9) instruction quoted in the opinion of the Supreme Court, quoting record.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Sadler,
Upon a switch in its own yard, which was connected with the tracks of defendant some distance away, plaintiff loaded a car with barrels of oil. It received a bill of lading for the shipment from a duly authorized railroad agent. Later, on the same day, this car, with others, was moved by defendant’s engine to a second switch within the plant of the refining company. Whether, in so doing, it was carried out onto the tracks of the railroad, and then pushed back to the point where it was subsequently destroyed, does not clearly appear. The same evening a fire caused…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- United States v. Erie Railroad CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- United States v. Brooklyn Eastern District TerminalSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Lloyd v. HaughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
- Detroit City Railway v. MillsMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Louisville & Jeffersonville Bridge Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Kimmel v. Yellow Cab Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
- Modern Tool Corp. v. Pennsylvania R. Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1951
- Paramount Dress Co. v. Kirby & Kirby, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
- Mochel v. Iowa State Traveling Men's Ass'nSupreme Court of Iowa · 1927
- Charles J. Webb & Sons, Inc. v. Central R. Co. of New JerseyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.