Legal Opinion

Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. McCaull Co

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided May 17, 1920No. 628PublishedCited by 92 opinions

1Opinion of the Court 1

253 U.S. 97

40 S.Ct. 504

64 L.Ed. 801

CHICAGO, M. & ST. P. RY. CO.

v.

McCAULL-DINSMORE CO.

No. 628.

Argued and Submitted April 23, 1920.

Decided May 17, 1920.

Mr. O. W. Dynes, of Chicago, Ill., for petitioner.

Mr. J. O. P. Wheelwright, of Minneapolis, Minn., for respondent.

2Opinion of the Court · HolmesJustice Holmes

1

This is an action for the loss of grain belonging to the plaintiff and delivered on November 17, 1915, to the defendant, the petitioner, in Montana, for transportation to Omaha, Nebraska. The grain was shipped under the uniform bill of lading, part of the tariffs filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission, by which it was…

3Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Adams Express Company v. CroningerSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  2. Hart v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  3. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. McCaull-Dinsmore Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
  4. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. McCaull-Dinsmore Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1919
  5. McCaull-Dinsmore Co. v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1918

4Cited by92 opinions

  1. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad v. NothnagleSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
  2. St. Johns N. F. Shipping Corp. v. . S. A. Companhia Geral Commercial Do Rio De JaneiroSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  3. Illinois Central Railroad v. CrailSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
  4. The Ansaldo San Giorgio I v. Rheinstrom Brothers Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1935
  5. Thomas v. Barton Lodge II, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1999

87 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