F. A. Drew Glass Co. v. Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. James E. Withrow, Judgei Section 598, .Revised Statutes, 1879, is a part of every contract made by a carrier which issues a receipt or bill of lading in this state, and overrides any provision or condition in the contract inconsistent therewith. Heil v. Railroad, 16 Mo. App. 363 ; Or ay croft v. Railroad, 18 Mo. App. 489; Baker v. Railroad, 34 Mo. App. 98.
1Opinion of the CourtRombauer, P. J.
The plaintiff shipped on the defendant’s road a box containing plate glass, consigned to James E. Clay, Paris, Kentucky. By the terms of the contract between the plaintiff and Clay, the title in the goods remained in the plaintiff until their delivery at the depot in Paris. The defendant’s road does not run to Paris, but terminates at the intermediate point *417of Cincinnati, Ohio, where it connects with the Kentucky Central railroad. The freight was safely carried by defendant to Cincinnati, and there delivered in good condition to the connecting carrier above mentioned. While it was being…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Dimmitt v. Kansas City, St. Joseph & Council Bluffs RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1890
- Heil v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- Lin v. Terre Haute & Indianapolis RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1881
- Orr v. Chicago & Alton RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Craycroft v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
3Cited by4 opinions
- Popham v. BarnardMissouri Court of Appeals · 1899
- Minter Bros. v. Southern Kansas RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1894
- Hance v. Wabash Western Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1894
- Griffith v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1905