Cincinnati Indianapolis & Chicago R.R. Co. v. Clarkson
Citation | 7 Ind. 474 |
Parties | The Cincinnati Indianapolis and Chicago Railroad Company v. Clarkson |
Decision Date | 12 June 1856 |
Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
From the Franklin Circuit Court.
The judgment is affirmed, with 1 per cent. damages and costs.
J Ryman, for appellant.
D. D Jones and H. Berry, for appellee.
Coker F. Clarkson sued the Cincinnati, Indianapolis and Chicago Railroad Company, upon a bill of exchange, and for compensation as stock solicitor of said company, claiming two per cent. on the amount of stock obtained. Stock was taken payable in property, real and personal. The company answered, denying the demands, alleging negligence in the transaction of business by said solicitor, whereby loss accrued to the company, payment, &c. Replies, constituting issues of fact. Jury trial. Verdict for the plaintiff for 1,200 dollars, and judgment, over a motion for a new trial, on the verdict.
2. That said Court erred in giving instructions one and two, as asked by the plaintiff.
The first of the foregoing instructions is too palpably erroneous to require comment. Under its common law power to contract, a corporation might agree to give a compensation for labor in obtaining stock.
The second is bad for assuming the facts to exist on which it is predicated.
The third is wrong, because where a person is employed by the month or year, simply to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Berry v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co.
...even though he has not been in active collusion with the conductor to defraud the company. Moss v. Johnson, 22 Ill. 633; Railroad Co. v. Montgomery, 7 Ind. 474; Lucas v. Railway Co., 33 Wis. 41; Whitehead v. Railway Co., 22 Mo. App. 60; Railway Co. v. Campbell, 76 Tex. 174, 13 S. W. 19; Dun......
-
Berry v. Missouri Pacific Railway Company
...... as upon the common law of agency. Chicago, etc., Railroad. Co. v. Dickson (1892), 143 Ill. 368, 32 ......
-
Rogers v. Leyden
...... etc., R. R. Co., 121 Ind. 124, 22 N.E. 876;. Cincinnati, etc., R. W. Co. v. Lang, 118. Ind. 579, 21 N.E. 317; ...W. Co. v. Sandford,. supra; Indianapolis, etc., R. W. Co. v. Watson, 114 Ind. 20 (5 Am. St. Rep. ...Cook, 99 Ind. 10, and cases. cited p. 14; Chicago, etc., R. R. Co. v. Ostrander, 116 Ind. 259, 15 N.E. 227. ......
-
Pennsylvania Co. v. Coyer
...Pac. 923;Keating v. Michigan Cent. R. R. Co., 97 Mich. 154, 56 N. W. 347, 37 Am. St. Rep. 328;Lawrenceburgh, etc., R. R. Co. v. Montgomery, 7 Ind. 474;Ohio, etc., R. R. Co. v. Dickerson, 59 Ind. 317;Ohio, etc., R. R. Co. v. Muhling, 30 Ill. 9, 81 Am. Dec. 336; Hazard v. Chicago, etc., R. R.......