Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. Peru-Van Zandt Implement Co.
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Reno district court; Peter J. Galle, judge: STATEMENT. The Port Huron Engine and Thrasher Company, of Port Huron, Mich., manufactures thrashing-machines and sells them throughout the country through local agents.
Read the full summary
Error from Reno district court; Peter J. Galle, judge: STATEMENT. The Port Huron Engine and Thrasher Company, of Port Huron, Mich., manufactures thrashing-machines and sells them throughout the country through local agents. Its agent at Hutchinson, Kan., is the Peru-Van Zandt Implement Company (defendant in error). By the contract of agency it is the duty of the Peru-Van Zandt company to advertise, introduce and sell the machines to those desiring to purchase, and when a sale is made an order is taken from the purchaser, in writing, directing the Port Huron company to ship the machinery…
1Opinion
OPINION ON REHEARING.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Graves, J.:
This case was decided at the March, 1906, sitting of this court. A rehearing was granted upon the proposition of law stated in the second paragraph of the syllabus, which reads:
“When a common carrier negligently delays the de*303livery of goods, so that the damages occasioned by such delay exceed the amount of freight due for the transportation of such goods, the consignee may rightfully demand the delivery of the goods without payment of the freight, and a refusal by the carrier to surrender possession upon such demand is…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Roberts v. WimberlyTexas Supreme Court · 1874
- Marsh v. Union Pacific Railway Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Colorado · 1882
- Northern Transportation Co. v. SellickIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
- Moran Bros. v. Northern Pacific RailroadWashington Supreme Court · 1898
- Bancroft v. PetersMichigan Supreme Court · 1857
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.