Dollinger v. Missouri Pac. R. Co., No. 19497.

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtSutton
Citation282 S.W. 1047
PartiesDOLLINGER et al. v. MISSOURI PAC. R. CO.
Decision Date01 June 1926
Docket NumberNo. 19497.
282 S.W. 1047
DOLLINGER et al.
v.
MISSOURI PAC. R. CO.
No. 19497.
St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.
June 1, 1926.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Madison County; Peter Huck, Judge.

"Not to be officially published."

Action by Paul Dollinger and another against the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Reversed.

James F. Green, of St. Louis, and J. C. Sheppard, of Poplar Bluff, for appellant.

Davis & Damron, of Fredericktown, for respondents.

SUTTON, C.


This is an action to recover damages for the breach of a contract for the shipment of certain hogs from Fredericktown, Mo., to the National stockyards, East St. Louis, Ill. The cause was tried to the court without a jury, there was a finding and judgment in favor of plaintiffs for $181.41, and the defendant appeals. The defendant assigns error here upon the refusal of its instruction in the nature of a demurrer to the evidence.

The petition alleges that on the 13th day of July, 1923, plaintiffs ordered of defendant, through its duly authorized station agent at Fredericktown, a double-deck stock car to be placed at the loading pens at Fredericktown, on July 16, 1923, in which to load two carloads of hogs on the date last mentioned, belonging to plaintiffs, for shipment from said station at Fredericktown to the National stockyards, Ill.; that the defendant, by its agent at the time said order for said car was made, as aforesaid, promised and agreed with plaintiffs that on the 16th day of July the defendant would have and provide at said loading pens a double-deck car suitable for the transportation of said hogs; that in pursuance to said agreement and understanding the plaintiffs drove their hogs to said loading pens and placed them in said pens at said point in due time to be loaded for shipment into said double-deck car on said date, but defendant breached its contract and promise made to plaintiffs aforesaid and failed to furnish and provide said car for the shipment of said hogs on said date, but did furnish to plaintiffs on said date an ordinary single-deck stock car; that thereupon plaintiffs loaded and shipped about half of said hogs in said single-deck car on July 16th, but on account of the failure of defendant to furnish said double-deck car, as it had agreed to do, the plaintiffs were compelled to hold about half of their hogs until July 17th, when defendant furnished another car in which to ship the remainder of said hogs; and that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 practice notes
  • May Department Stores Co. v. Union E.L. & P. Co., No. 34288.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • June 30, 1937
    ...185 S.W. 69; Adams Exp. Co. v. Burr Oak, 206 S.W. 173; Davis v. Cornwell, 264 U.S. 560, 44 Sup. Ct. 410; Dollinger v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 282 S.W. 1047; Richey & Gilbert v. Ry. Co., 204 N.W. 27; Saitta & Jones v. Railroad Co., 179 N.Y.S. 471; American Ry. Ex. Co. v. Peninsula, 130 Atl......
1 cases
  • May Department Stores Co. v. Union E.L. & P. Co., No. 34288.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • June 30, 1937
    ...185 S.W. 69; Adams Exp. Co. v. Burr Oak, 206 S.W. 173; Davis v. Cornwell, 264 U.S. 560, 44 Sup. Ct. 410; Dollinger v. Mo. Pac. Ry. Co., 282 S.W. 1047; Richey & Gilbert v. Ry. Co., 204 N.W. 27; Saitta & Jones v. Railroad Co., 179 N.Y.S. 471; American Ry. Ex. Co. v. Peninsula, 130 Atl......

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