Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Smart v. Oregon Short Line R.

Utah Supreme Court

Decided July 8, 1919No. 3323Published

Appeal from District Court, First District, Cache County; J. D. Call, Judge. • Action by L. S. Smart against the Oregon Short Line Railroad Company, a corporation. From judgment of nonsuit, plaintiff appeals.

1ConcurrenceFrick, J.

I concur. I desire to add to what is said by Mr. Justice WEBER, however, that in this case the parties entered into a contract of shipment wherein the plaintiff agreed to load the sheep at' the initial point of shipment and to unload *611them after their arrival at their destination." The sheep were agreed to be transported and unloaded at a way station on defendant’s line where the facilities for unloading were as stated by Mr. Justice WEBER, and where the business of the defendant did not justify the maintenance of a separate switching engine and crew. These facts were all within the knowledge…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Cincinnati, Indianapolis, St. Louis & Chicago Railway Co. v. CaseIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Ecton v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1907
  3. Southern Pac. Co. v. ArnettCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1903
  4. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad v. VaughanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
  5. Gilbert v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1908

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API