Kirk v. Lehigh Valley Transportation Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. E. E. Porterfield, Judge. (1) The demurrer to the evidence was properly sustained for the reason that the plaintiff utterly failed to prove any joint liability on the'part of the defendant. Hutchinson on Carriers (3 Ed.), secs. 231, 249, 264, 309; 15 Encyc. PI. and Pr., 547; Heikamp v. La M'otte, 59 Mo. App. 249; Meyer v. Raihvay, 120 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. E. E. Porterfield, Judge. (1) The demurrer to the evidence was properly sustained for the reason that the plaintiff utterly failed to prove any joint liability on the'part of the defendant. Hutchinson on Carriers (3 Ed.), secs. 231, 249, 264, 309; 15 Encyc. PI. and Pr., 547; Heikamp v. La M'otte, 59 Mo. App. 249; Meyer v. Raihvay, 120 Mo. App. 288; Steamboat Lynx v. King, 12 Mo. 272; Davis v. Railroad, 89 Mo. 340; Gillespie v. Railroad, 6 Mo. App. 554; Moffatt, etc., Co. v. Railroad, 113 Mo. App. 544; Elam v. Railroad, 93 S. W. 851; Railroad v.…
1Opinion of the CourtBroaddus, P. J.
On May 29,1903, the plaintiff entered into a contract with defendant Lehigh Valley Transportation Company to transport four hundred sacks of flour from Kansas City to the city of New York and paid to it the freight charges therefor, which company issued to plaintiff a through bill of lading acknowledging receipt of the goods. The fact was, however, the said company having no line of railroad at Kansas City, the flour Avas delivered to the defendant Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. to deliver *102over its switches at Kansas City to the Chicago & Alton Railroad Co. to be carried by it to the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kingman St. Louis Implement Co. v. Southern Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1908