Dahrooge v. Pere Marquette Railroad
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to superior court of Grand Bapids; Stuart, J. Case by George Dahrooge against the Pere Merquette Bailroad Company to recover the value of goods lost in transit. There was judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. .
1Opinion of the CourtMontgomery, J.
_ne plaintiff is a merchant, who» travels from place to place by rail, taking with him his stock, consisting, in large part, of fine silk apparel for ladies. On October 25, 1904, he was at Ludington, and, *545desiring to go to Traverse City, purchased a ticket over defendant’s line and had his goods checked as baggage. He had four parcels with him — one zinc trunk, two large telescopes, and a hand satchel. The last he did not check, but the first three were checked and marked on the agent’s memorandum, “ Z. T., Tel. and S. C.,” meaning zinc trunk, telescope, and sample case. Plaintiff testified…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Sloman v. . Great Western Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis Railway Co. v. McGaheySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1897
- Cavanagh v. Township of RiversideMichigan Supreme Court · 1904
- Amory v. Wabash RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
3Cited by1 opinion
- Kansas City, M. & O. Ry. Co. v. FugattSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915