Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. Widman
Indiana Court of Appeals
From the ITarrison Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtDavis, C. J.
The first and second errors assigned are:
■ 1. That the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
2. The court erred in overruling the demurrer to the complaint.
Appellee sued on a written contract which he sets out and makes park of his complaint. This contract, a bill of lading, stipulates specifically the terms upon which the shipment is made, and the conditions to be met upon the part of appellee as well as the part to be performed by appellant.
The contract set out in the complaint contains the following condition or specification: “Claims for loss or damage…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Commercial Union Assurance Co. v. State ex rel. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
- Home Insurance v. DukeIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
- United States Express Co. v. HarrisIndiana Supreme Court · 1875
3Cited by7 opinions
- St. Louis & San Francisco R. R. v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1906
- Chicago & Southeastern Railway Co. v. Fifth National BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1901
- Mondamin Meadows Dairy Co. v. BrudiIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
- Parrill v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1900
- Klair v. Philadelphia, Baltimore & Washington RailroadSuperior Court of Delaware · 1910
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.