Sheffield King Milling Co. v. Chicago Great Western Railroad
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
Action to recover overcharges on shipments of wheat from Minneapolis to East Joliet, Illinois, milled in transit at Faribault, Minnesota, and destined for Dorchester, Massachusetts. There was judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant appeals.
There were introduced in evidence two published tariffs of the defendant, and other documents of less importance. Their contents are not in evidence, except as witnesses referred to them, or quoted from them. The certificate of settlement of the case does not mention them. Under our practice the fact shown by the settled case prevails over the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MaxwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Sage v. RudnickSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
- Acker Post, No. 21 v. CarverSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1877
- Clarke v. Cold Spring Opera House Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
- Blake v. LeeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Village of Aurora v. Commissioner of TaxationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
- Big Diamond Mills Co. v. Chicago Great Western RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929