St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Grayson
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Greene Circuit Court; Frank Smith, Judge; 1. To be effectual, a waiver must not only be made intentionally, but with knowledge of the circumstances'. There was here no agreement, either verbal or written, to waive the stipulation in the contract. If waived at all, it was by the conduct of the agent Wise; but nothing in the record indicates either that he knew of the stipulation or that he intended to waive it. 105 U. S. 359; 9 Am.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Greene Circuit Court; Frank Smith, Judge; 1. To be effectual, a waiver must not only be made intentionally, but with knowledge of the circumstances'. There was here no agreement, either verbal or written, to waive the stipulation in the contract. If waived at all, it was by the conduct of the agent Wise; but nothing in the record indicates either that he knew of the stipulation or that he intended to waive it. 105 U. S. 359; 9 Am. St. Rep. 571; 116 Fed. 381; 82 Fed. 406; 65 Ark. 240; 87 Ark. 326. 2. The evidence is not sufficient to warrant -the jury in finding for plaintiffs.…
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
On the 12th day of July, 1907, the plaintiffs instituted .this action against the defendant, and allegéd that they owned and were feeding a large herd of cattle at Jonesboro, Arkansas, and on January 13, 1907, at about 2 o’clock p. m., they loaded on the defendant’s line 251 head into ten cars, to be transported to the National Stock Yards in East St. Louis, in the State of Illinois, and the defendant unnecessarily and negligently delayed the shipment for about eleven hours. The cattle were destined for the market of Monday, January 14, but on account of the negligence of the defendant they…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hudson & Co. v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1894
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. RussellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1897
- Wallace v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1903
- Harned v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1892
3Cited by22 opinions
- St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. LaddSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. MitchellIndiana Supreme Court · 1910
- Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. CarlSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Jackson v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. JamesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.