Legal Opinion
Fort Worth & D. C. Ry. Co. v. F. Burkart Mfg. Co.
District Court, E.D. Missouri
Decided July 18, 1944No. 619PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HULEN, District Judge.
This cause was submitted on an agreed statement of facts. Defendant purchased 1,000 bales of cotton from one Pruden to be delivered F.O.B. St. Louis, payment to be made by sight draft. The bills of lading were made out to Pruden’s order. Pruden and plaintiff as carrier entered into a conspiracy as a result of which the commodity was wrongfully labeled as cotton regins, instead of compressed and uncompressed cotton. Cotton regins travel at a lower freight rate than compressed and uncompressed cotton. Pruden paid the freight charge and as a result of his conspiracy with…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Keogh v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MaxwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. FinkSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. MuggSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Southern Pacific Company, a Corporation of the State of Delaware v. Miller Abattoir Company, a Corporation of the State of New JerseyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
- Transmix Corp. v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1960
- Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad Company v. Midwest Homes, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1967
- Wabash Railroad v. BergMissouri Court of Appeals · 1958