Legal Opinion

United States Express Co. v. Haines

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1868PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Writ oe Error to the Circuit Court of Tazewell county; the Hon. James Harriott, Judge, presiding. This was an action of replevin, brought, in the court below, by the defendant in error, against the plaintiffs in error, for a package of money, alleged to contain eight hundred dollars, in United States treasury and national bank notes.

Read the full summary

Writ oe Error to the Circuit Court of Tazewell county; the Hon. James Harriott, Judge, presiding. This was an action of replevin, brought, in the court below, by the defendant in error, against the plaintiffs in error, for a package of money, alleged to contain eight hundred dollars, in United States treasury and national bank notes. On the trial, the court excluded the receipt given for the money, as evidence of a contract between the parties, for the reason that it was imstampcd, and this point alone is considered by this court.

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Breese

We have considered hut one point in this case, as the determination of it disposes of the case for the present.

The -plaintiffs in error claimed there was an express contract to forward the package to Atchison, only, and there deliver it to the Overland Stage Line, and, having so delivered it, they were not responsible for any delay beyond that point.

The company, on receiving the package, at Pekin, in this State, gave to the defendant in error this receipt:

“ Received of James Haines, pa. said to contain cy. valued at eight hundred dollars, and marked Jonathan Haines, Austin, Nevada, which we…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Adams Express Co. v. HaynesIllinois Supreme Court · 1866
  2. Craig v. DimockIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
  3. Latham v. SmithIllinois Supreme Court · 1867

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Small v. SlocumbSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
  2. Knox v. RossiNevada Supreme Court · 1899
  3. More v. ClymerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1882
  4. Plunkett v. HanschkaSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Trowbridge v. AddomsSupreme Court of Colorado · 1897

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API