Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. Shull
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion
ON REHEARING
George Rose Smith, J.,
on rehearing. Our original opinion did not discuss what the appellant asserts to be a prejudicial conflict in the court’s instructions. This contention is now renewed in a petition for rehearing, it being insisted that the present case is so contrary to four prior decisions that they have been tacitly overruled.
The court gave the plaintiff’s requested Instruction No. 1, which'told the jury in substance that if the strawberries were received by the defendant in good condition and were delivered by it in damaged condition, there would arise a presumption of…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. v. BurfordSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
- American Railway Express Company v. ColeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. FineSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. v. ColeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Railway Express Agency v. H. Rouw Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1931