Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Hutchings, Sealy & Co.
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Labette district court; Thomas J. Flannelly, judge. STATEMENT. This action was commenced in the district court of Labette county, on March 29, 1905, to recover moneys advanced on certain bills of lading issued by the defendant, the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company, to J. K. Davidson & Co. and assigned to the plaintiffs. The defendant operates a line of railway extending from Kansas City, Mo., to Galvestbn, Tex.
Read the full summary
Error from Labette district court; Thomas J. Flannelly, judge. STATEMENT. This action was commenced in the district court of Labette county, on March 29, 1905, to recover moneys advanced on certain bills of lading issued by the defendant, the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company, to J. K. Davidson & Co. and assigned to the plaintiffs. The defendant operates a line of railway extending from Kansas City, Mo., to Galvestbn, Tex. In June, 1900, the plaintiffs, Hutchings, Sealy & Co., were engaged in the grain business in Galveston, Tex., and one J. K. Davidson, doing business as J. K.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Porter, J.:
The first question raised by the defendant to the petition — -that by virtue of chapter 325 of the Laws of 1905 the action can not be maintained by *762the plaintiffs because they are non-residents of the state — is easily answered. Without attempting to pass upon any of the provisions of the act'it is sufficient to say that it has no application, for the reason that this action was brought on the 29th day of March, 1905, and the act in question did not take effect until June 8, 1905.
It is contended that the demurrer to the petition should have…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Pollard v. VintonSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Schooner Freeman, &C. v. BuckinghamSupreme Court of the United States · 1856
- Friedlander v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- National Bank of Commerce v. Chicago, Burlington & Northern RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Bank of Batavia v. New York, Lake Erie & Western RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. HaroldSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Nichols v. NoldSupreme Court of Kansas · 1953
- Sluss v. Brown-Crummer Investment Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1933
- Hamilton v. Empire Gas & Fuel Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1924
- Douglass v. LoftusSupreme Court of Kansas · 1911
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.