Barrett v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — How. James E. Withrow, Judge. • The stipulation in the message being, “that no claim for damages shall be valid unless presented' in writing within thirty days after sending the message,” such notice is not. necessary where the message is not sent. Tel. Co. v. Yopst, 118 Ind. 249 ; 20 N. E. Rep. 222; Tel. Co. v. Way, 83 Ala. 556 ; 4 S. Rep. 844.
1Opinion of the Court
‘Biggs, J.
This is an action against the telegraph company for damages for the failure to transmit or deliver the following message, delivered to the defendant’s agent at Denison, Texas, on the night of the eighteenth of October, 1888 :
“To Holt, Payne & Co., Union Stock-Yards, St. Louis, Mo.:
“Have your bank to notify First National Bank of Denison to pay draft for seven hundred and fifty-six dollars Friday ; will ship three loads.
“ (Signed) E. P. Barrett.”
*544This message was written by the plaintiff on one of the defendant’s blanks ; among the printed conditions and stipulations on which was the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. WaySupreme Court of Alabama · 1887
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. YopstIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
- Abeles v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- State ex rel. McCracken v. BlackmanSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
3Cited by8 opinions
- Price v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- Wilbur v. Southwest Missouri Electric Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1905
- Muth ex. of Reuter v. St. Louis & Meramec River RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1901
- Grant v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- Hughes v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1899
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.