Belcher v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas
| Decision Date | 26 November 1898 |
| Citation | 47 S.W. 1020 |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
| Parties | BELCHER v. MISSOURI, K. & T. RY. CO. OF TEXAS. |
In this motion it is contended that we "erred in concluding as a matter of fact that the local agent of the appellee at Sherman, who received the car of hulls, and issued the bill of lading therefor, had no notice of the necessity of an immediate delivery, and the condition of Belcher at Gainesville, for the reason that such conclusion is not sustained by the evidence." We made no such finding as this. We found that he did not have such notice at the time he issued the bill of lading, which, in contemplation of law, was the time he received the hulls; and there is ample evidence to sustain this finding. In the first place, under a perfectly full and fair charge submitting this issue, the jury found against the plaintiff, which meant that they found that the agent at Sherman had no notice, at the time he issued the bill of lading, for that was the principal issue in the case. One of appellant's witnesses (Bonham) swears that the agent had such notice by telegram before noon on December 24th. Jones, who consigned and shipped the hulls and took the bill of lading, says he notified him on the 24th, but whether before or after the bill was signed he does not state. The agent swears that he did not have such notice until Sunday morning, December 25th, and produced the telegram received by him, giving such notice. He did not remember any conversation with Jones about it. The evidence of the agent at Gainesville shows that it was not sent until 2:05 p. m., December 24th, and then to the train master at Denison. The train master forwarded it at 5:25 p. m. of that day to the agent at Sherman, where it was received by an operator, and after 5:45 p. m. of that day laid on the agent's desk at Sherman. It was not actually seen by the agent until Sunday morning, when he immediately sent for the car of hulls, which was then standing on the Texas & Pacific track at the oil mill. The car was not, in fact, received by defendant until Monday noon. The exact time of signing the bill of lading is nowhere shown, but it was deposited in the bank at Sherman between 12 m. and 2 p. m., December 24th. The jury having passed on all this evidence, and having found against plaintiff's theory, we did not feel authorized to reverse their finding, where the evidence is so conflicting. We, however,...
To continue reading
Request your trial