Richmond, N., I. & B.R. Co. v. Richardson

• Decision Date: 11 December 1897
• Citation: 43 S.W. 465
• Parties: RICHMOND, N., I. & B. R. CO. v. RICHARDSON.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

43 S.W. 465

RICHMOND, N., I. & B. R. CO. v. RICHARDSON.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

December 11, 1897

Appeal from circuit court, Estill county.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by Curtis Richardson against the Richmond, Nicholasville Irvine & Beattyville Railroad Company for damages for failure to transport and deliver a car load of hogs. Verdict for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. Reversed.

Riddell & Riddell, W. Marshall Bullitt, Bennett & Chenault, and Bullitt & Shields, for appellant.

White &amp Smith, for appellee.

GUFFY J.

The plaintiff (now appellee) instituted this action in the Estill circuit court, seeking to recover Judgment for $375 on account of damages sustained by the failure of appellant to transport and deliver one car load of hogs and cows to Green & Embry, Cincinnati, Ohio, which it agreed, as is alleged, to ship from Irvine, Ky. to said Green & Embry. The substance of the complaint is that four of the hogs were never delivered and one was delivered dead, and that, by reason of several days' delay in delivery the hogs decreased in value, and that the market at Cincinnati also declined. It is further alleged that the failure to deliver as agreed between the parties was on account of the carelessness and negligence of appellant. The appellant demurred to the jurisdiction of the court and also to the petition, because it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, which demurrer was overruled. Thereupon the appellant answered, and denied the jurisdiction of the court in its answer, and also denied that under the contract mentioned in the petition, or under any contract, it had received on cars three cows, or either of the cows mentioned in the petition, or agreed to deliver same, in good order and condition, at the Farmers' & Drovers' Stock Yards, to Green & Embry, in Cincinnati, Ohio, and further denied, under the contract mentioned in the petition, that defendant agreed to deliver the hogs at any point in Cincinnati, and also denied any negligence. Appellant flies a copy of the written contract and, in substance, avers that the undertaking was to only deliver the hogs to the connecting line, to wit, the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company, at Richmond, Ky. and that it did do so within a short time after the shipment from Irvine. The contract reads as follows: "Original. Richmond, Nicholasville, Irvine and Beattyville Railroad. John MacLeod, Receiver. Live-Stock Contract. Irvine, Kentucky, Station, Jan. 19th, 1893. This...