Dimmitt v. Kansas City, St. J. & C. B. R. Co.

Decision Date09 March 1891
CourtMissouri Supreme Court
PartiesDIMMITT et al. v. KANSAS CITY, ST. J. & C. B. R. Co.

Appeal from circuit court, Buchanan county; JOSEPH P. GRUBB, Judge.

Strong & Mosman, for appellant. Ramey & Brown, for respondent.

BRACE, J.

This case is certified here from the Kansas City court of appeals as one involving a constitutional question. The material averments of the petition are that the plaintiffs delivered to the defendant, at the city of St. Joseph, in the state of Missouri, one box in good order, containing 6,000 cigars, of the value of $315, marked and consigned to one J. McAleer at the city of Deadwood, in the territory of Dakota, to be carried and delivered to said consignee at said Deadwood according to said marks and directions; that said defendant then and there received said box of cigars for the purpose aforesaid, and issued to plaintiff the following receipt or bill of lading: "Received, St. Joseph, Mo., 6-10, 1881, from J. W. Dimmitt & Co., in apparent good order, by the K. C., St. Jo & C. B. Railroad Company, the following articles marked as below, which are to be delivered without unnecessary delay in like good order, at Omaha station, to consignee or owner, or to such company or carriers as per marks and directions in margin, subject to its charter, freight regulations, and agreements. In witness whereof, the agent of said railroad hath affirmed the three bills of lading, all of this tenor and date, one of which being accomplished, the others to stand void.

                =============================================================
                MARKS AND CONSIGNEES.    NO. PKS.      ARTICLES.      WEIGHT
                -------------------------------------------------------------
                J. W. McAleer,                        Box Cigars
                  Deadwood, D. T.            1          strapped,      200."
                    via Ft. Pierre.                   corded and
                Acct. Dougherty & Co.                    sealed
                -------------------------------------------------------------
                

— That the defendant carried said box to Omaha, and delivered the same to the Chicago & Northwestern Railroad Company, which company carelessly and negligently failed to deliver said box to said Dougherty & Co., whereby said cigars became worthless and were totally lost to plaintiffs. The answer of the defendant was a general denial. The case was tried by the court without a jury upon the following agreed statement of facts: "It is agreed between the parties hereto, for the purposes of a trial of this cause only, that the plaintiffs are partners in business at St. Joseph, Mo. The defendant is a corporation duly incorporated and organized for railroad purposes, and engaged in the business of a common carrier over its line of railway, which extends from Kansas City, in the state of Missouri, through St. Joseph, in said state, to Omaha, in the state of Nebraska, which latter is its northern terminus; that the Chicago & Northwestern Railroad Company is a corporation duly incorporated and organized for railroad purposes, owning and operating a railroad from Omaha, Nebraska, to Fort Pierre, Dakota, and engaged in the business of a common carrier over the same; that Deadwood, the destination of the goods hereinafter mentioned, and the residence of J. McAleer, is in Dakota, several hundred miles from Omaha, and not upon the line of any railroad; that the usual route and course of transportation of freights from St. Joseph to Deadwood is over the defendant's road to Omaha, thence over the Chicago & Northwestern Railroad to Fort Pierre, and thence by wagons and teams to Dougherty & Co. to Deadwood; that on the 15th day of June, 1881, the plaintiffs delivered to the defendant at St. Joseph the goods described in the account or bill of items attached to the petition herein, of the value therein stated, in a box marked `J. McAleer, Deadwood, D. T., via Ft. Pierre, care Dougherty & Co.,' and presented at the same time a receipt or bill of lading furnished and prepared by them [being the same attached to the petition] to the station agent of the defendant at St. Joseph, who received said goods, and signed and delivered said receipt as and for the shipment...

To continue reading

Request your trial
30 cases
  • Nenno v. Chicago, Rock Island And Pacific Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • March 29, 1904
    ...Mo.App. 282; Orr v. Railroad, 21 Mo.App. 333; Snider v. Adams Express Co., 63 Mo. 376; Coates v. U. S. Express Co., 45 Mo. 238; Dimmit v. Railroad, 103 Mo. 433. (2) Section R. S. 1899, has no application to this case or to the questions raised by this appeal. That statute refers and applies......
  • Crockett v. St. Louis & Hannibal Railway Company
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • March 8, 1910
    ... ... 369] West ... Shore Railroad Company at New York for transportation to ... Kansas City, Missouri, under a contract made with said ... company, which agreed to carry only to the end ... matter in what form the bill of lading was issued. The ... construction began with Dimmitt v. Railroad, 103 Mo ... 433, 15 S.W. 761, was retained in a modified form in ... McCann v ... ...
  • Eckles v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • April 18, 1905
    ... ... [87 S.W. 100] ...           Appeal ... from St. Louis City Circuit Court.--Hon. Franklin Ferriss, ...          AFFIRMED ... Pacific should be delivered to the Atchison, Topeka & Santa ... Fe at Kansas City, the through rate from Kansas City to Los ... Angeles being $ 1.75 per hundred pounds. On ... Nines v ... Railway, 107 Mo. 457, 18 S.W. 26; Dimmitt v ... Railway, 103 Mo. 433, 15 S.W. 761; Grain Co. v ... Railway, 138 Mo. 668, 40 S.W. 894; ... ...
  • Crockett v. St. Louis & H. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • February 1, 1910
    ...to a point beyond its own line, no matter in what form the bill of lading was issued. The construction began with Dimmitt v. Railroad, 103 Mo. 433, 15 S. W. 761, was retained in a modified form in McCann v. Eddy, 133 Mo. 59, 33 S. W. 71, 35 L. R. A. 110, and, right or wrong, is beyond the p......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT