Howard v. Chicago, St. Louis, & New Orleans Railroad
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Yalobusha County. Hon. W. S. Featherston, Judge. Posters and hand-bills, advertising “ a strictly first-class excursion,” over the appellee’s railroad to New Orleans, on October 25, 1881, stated that passengers could “remain five days in the city,” and added: “ Tickets good to return any day and on any regular train for five days,” and also these statements : “ Tickets on sale by our agents at all prominent stations,” and “ Fare for the round…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Yalobusha County. Hon. W. S. Featherston, Judge. Posters and hand-bills, advertising “ a strictly first-class excursion,” over the appellee’s railroad to New Orleans, on October 25, 1881, stated that passengers could “remain five days in the city,” and added: “ Tickets good to return any day and on any regular train for five days,” and also these statements : “ Tickets on sale by our agents at all prominent stations,” and “ Fare for the round trip from Water Valley, $6.00.” These notices concluded : “ For further information, apply to our agents, or address A.…
1Opinion of the CourtCampbell, C. J.
When a ticket does not purport to be a complete agreement between the carrier and the passenger, suppletory evidence is admissible to show that there was a further contract than is indicated by the ticket, but when it sets out the terms of a special contract, it is to be looked to as the evidence of the contract and is conclusive as to its terms. The ticket purchased by the appellant contained the terms of the contract for carriage, and was properly regarded by the circuit court as the sole evidence of her rights. It was therefore *199not erroneous to exclude the testimony offered by her. But…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Wilson v. New Orleans & Northeastern R. R.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1885
- International & Great Northern Railroad v. IngCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1902