Cantwell v. Terminal Railroad
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. George H. Williams, Judge. The court erred in holding that the defendant was not entitled to retain possession of the trunk until the charges against it had been tendered or paid. 2 Hutch-ins 56 S. W. 253; Wells v. Thomas, 27 Mo. 17; I. C. C- Conference Rulings 75, Bulletin No. 4; Railroad v. Reed, 121 S. W. 519'; Moses v. Railroad, 32 Pac. 488; Miller v. Railroad, 18 S. W. 954; Pearce v. Railroad, 192 U. S. 179; Coal & Coke…
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. George H. Williams, Judge. The court erred in holding that the defendant was not entitled to retain possession of the trunk until the charges against it had been tendered or paid. 2 Hutch-ins 56 S. W. 253; Wells v. Thomas, 27 Mo. 17; I. C. C- Conference Rulings 75, Bulletin No. 4; Railroad v. Reed, 121 S. W. 519'; Moses v. Railroad, 32 Pac. 488; Miller v. Railroad, 18 S. W. 954; Pearce v. Railroad, 192 U. S. 179; Coal & Coke Co. v. Railroad, 116 Mo. App. 214. (1) The evidence shows a lack of all privity between the Terminal R. R. Association…
1Opinion of the CourtCaulfield, J.
(after stating the facts). — I. Defendant, Terminal Railroad Association, did not. detain plaintiff’s trunk for the Missouri, Kansas and Texas Ry. Co. nor assert any lien of its own; it made the claim solely on behalf of the Galveston, Houston and San Antonio Ry. Co.
Our first question then is, whether the Galveston, Houston and San Antonio Ry. Co. had. a lien on plaintiff’s sole personal baggage for the fare of the child she had with her. It may be accepted that she was responsible for the child’s fare. [Hutchinson, Carriers (3 Ed.), sec. 1025.] But does it follow that therefore the carrier…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Berry Coal & Coke Co. v. Chicago, Peoria & St. Louis Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1906
- Steamboat Virginia v. KraftSupreme Court of Missouri · 1857