Louisville Bridge Co. v. Louisville & Nashville R. R.
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 83 — ACTION ON CONTRACT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT, LAW AND EQUITY DIVISION.' 1. Effect of reformed petitions upon former pleadings filed in the cause: Smith v. Pelot, 65 Hun, 631; Holmes v. Jones, 121 N. Y., 461; Mulligan v. 111. Cent. Ry. Co., 36 la., 181; Brown v. Pickard, 4 Utah, 492. 2. On practical construction of a contract. Louisville Turnpike Co. v. Shadburne, 1 Ky. Law Rep., 325; Thompson v. Thompson, 2 B. M., 166; 11 Am. & Eng.
Read the full summary
Case 83 — ACTION ON CONTRACT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT, LAW AND EQUITY DIVISION.' 1. Effect of reformed petitions upon former pleadings filed in the cause: Smith v. Pelot, 65 Hun, 631; Holmes v. Jones, 121 N. Y., 461; Mulligan v. 111. Cent. Ry. Co., 36 la., 181; Brown v. Pickard, 4 Utah, 492. 2. On practical construction of a contract. Louisville Turnpike Co. v. Shadburne, 1 Ky. Law Rep., 325; Thompson v. Thompson, 2 B. M., 166; 11 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, 518. 3. When money can be recovered as paid by mistake. Tyler v. Smith, 18 B. M., 797. 4. What contracts are mutual and…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE BURNAM
delivered the opinion of the court.
This suit was instituted by appellee against the Louisville Bridge Company, the Jeffersonville, Madison & Indianapolis Railroad Company, the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company, the Ohio & Mississippi Railway Company, the Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Company, and the Louisville, Evansville & St. Louis Consolidated Railway Company to recover, under a contract made on the 5th day of June, 1872, excessive tolls alleged to have been collected from it by the Louisville Bridge Company for the years 1892, 1893, 1894,…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Louisville Bridge Co. v. L. & N. R. R.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1903
- Pittsburg, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. DoddCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1903
- Dodd v. Pittsburg, C., C., & St. L. Ry.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1908
- Louisville & N. R. R. v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1903