Keith v. Amende
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
CASE 104 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL PROM HARRISON CIRCUIT COURT. CITED— 1 Baily, 174 ; Benjamin vs. Sinclair. 9 B. M., 112; Gowdy Sf Co. vs. Lyon. 1 Greenleafs Evidence, secs. 78, 220, 805. Chitty on Carriers, 167. 6 Watts, 424; Warden vs. Green. ' 5 Alabama, 430 ; Mayland vs. Mosby. 4 Ohio, 334; May vs. Babcock. 3 C. P., 318 ; Bradley vs. Waterhouse. Redfield on Railways, 262-299. 3 Watts Sf Sargent, 21; Ralf vs. Ralf. 19 Penn.
Read the full summary
CASE 104 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL PROM HARRISON CIRCUIT COURT. CITED— 1 Baily, 174 ; Benjamin vs. Sinclair. 9 B. M., 112; Gowdy Sf Co. vs. Lyon. 1 Greenleafs Evidence, secs. 78, 220, 805. Chitty on Carriers, 167. 6 Watts, 424; Warden vs. Green. ' 5 Alabama, 430 ; Mayland vs. Mosby. 4 Ohio, 334; May vs. Babcock. 3 C. P., 318 ; Bradley vs. Waterhouse. Redfield on Railways, 262-299. 3 Watts Sf Sargent, 21; Ralf vs. Ralf. 19 Penn. Rep., 243 ; Cox vs. Heisley. 5 Watts, 446 ; Leech vs. Baldwin. Sedgwick on Damages, 468. Angelí on Carriers, sec. 556. 2 Met., 209 ; Schweins vs. Sims. OITED— 1 Story…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE HARDIN
delivered the opinion of the court:
This was an action against the appellants, as owners of the Kentucky Central Railroad, to recover for damage alleged to have been done to a melodeon while in their possession for transportation from Covington to Paris, in Kentucky.
The appellants by their answer placed their defense upon two grounds:
1. Admitting that they received from the plaintiff’s agent, at their depot at Covington, for transportation over their road, two boxes marked “ fancy goods,” they aver they had no knowledge or information on which to found a belief as to whether said…
2Cited by1 opinion
- National Equipment Co. v. HeibCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1954