Jones v. Cincinnati, Selma & Mobile Railroad
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Hale. Tried before the Hon. John Moore. This action was brought by Jim Jones against the appellee, as a common carrier, to recover damages for the loss of a package or bundle of goods, containing blankets, &c., which was delivered to the defendant at Greensboro, for transportation to Birmingham, and safe delivery there to plaintiff; and was commenced in a justice’s court, on the 13th February, 1889. On appeal to the Circuit Court, that court…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Hale. Tried before the Hon. John Moore. This action was brought by Jim Jones against the appellee, as a common carrier, to recover damages for the loss of a package or bundle of goods, containing blankets, &c., which was delivered to the defendant at Greensboro, for transportation to Birmingham, and safe delivery there to plaintiff; and was commenced in a justice’s court, on the 13th February, 1889. On appeal to the Circuit Court, that court charged the jury, on the evidence adduced, that they must find for the defendant. The plaintiff excepted to this charge,…
1Opinion of the CourtStone, C. J.
This case comes before us on uncontroverted facts. The appellant delivered to the appellee railway company, at Greensboro, Ala., two boxes and one bundle of household goods, and received therefor a bill of lading, signed by the defendant’s depot-agent, describing the packages, and stating they were consigned to Jim Jones, at Birmingham, Ala., “to be transported by the Cincinnati, Selma & Mobile Bailway Company, and connecting rail, water, or other carriers, until they reach the station or wharf nearest to ultimate destination.” The bill of lading contains the following clause: “It is mutually…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Railroad Co. v. LockwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Grace v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Steele v. TownsendSupreme Court of Alabama · 1861
- Goetter, Weil & Co. v. PickettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
- Dawson v. BurrusSupreme Court of Alabama · 1882
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Ex parte Louisville & Nashville R. R.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1912
- Beck & Pauli Lithographing Co. v. HouppertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
- Western Railway Co. v. HarwellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1890
- Bates v. HarteSupreme Court of Alabama · 1899
- Central of Ga. Ry. Co. v. Chicago Varnish Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1910
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.