Terre Haute Ry Co v. Struble

Decision Date26 November 1883
Citation3 S.Ct. 270,109 U.S. 381,27 L.Ed. 970
PartiesTERRE HAUTE & I. RY. CO. v. STRUBLE
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

John G. Williams, for plaintiff in error.

Jeff. Chandler, for defendant in error.

HARLAN, J.

This action was brought by Struble, the defendant in error, to recover damages for an alleged breach of a written contract entered into between him and the Terre Haute & Indianapolis Railroad Company. A verdict and judgment were rendered in favor of plaintiff for the sum of $10,440. The defendant moved for a new trial and in arrest of judgment and both motions having been denied, the case has been brought here for review.

By the contract in question, Struble obligated himself to build and keep in good order, on his leased grounds in East St. Louis, Illinois, all necessary stock-yards and feeding-pens suitable for the reception, feeding, handling, loading, and unloading of live-stock whic might be shipped or transported over the Terre Haute & Indianapolis Railroad to and from East St. Louis; to receive and unload all live-stock over that road; to collect all freight and charges on same and pay over to the company or its authorized agents all moneys so collected; to order from the proper agent of the company all cars necessary for the transportation of live-stock from East St. Louis; to load in a proper manner all live-stock for transportation from that place by that company; to bed such cars at a cost to shippers of not more than one dollar per car, to be collected by him from shippers; and to attend to all other necessary matters pertaining to the safe and prompt loading of all such live-stock for transportation over that road.

The company, in consideration of the performance by Struble of the stipulations of the contract, agreed to build all necessary loading schutes for the use of the company connected with said yards; to send all live-stock coming to East St. Louis over its road to Struble's yards, except such as may be specially ordered otherwise by shippers or owners; to pay him 50 cents per load for all stock received by him over the road and unloaded in his yards, and two dollars for each and every car of live-stock loaded by him to be transported by the company from East St. Louis; and to give him the loading of all live-stock which may be transported over its road from that city. Struble's yards were completed and opened for business in December, 1870. From that date until some time in October, 1873, all live-stock coming to East St. Louis over defendant's line was unloaded at those yards, and live-stock shipped over that road from that city was loaded by Struble. Early, however, in the fall of 1873 the National Stock-yards were completed and opened for business. They were just outside of the corporate limits of East St. Louis, and near defendant's road. The plaintiff claimed that up to October, 1873, he performed all the conditions of the contract, and was ready, willing, and able to comply with it in all respects until it should, by its own terms, be terminated, but that he was prevented by defendant after that date from fully executing it. All...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Cumberland Valley Railroad Co. v. Gettysburg & Harrisburg Railway Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
    • October 5, 1896
    ...... law: Pomeroy, Spec. Perf. of Contracts, sec. 47; Koch's. App., 93 Pa. 434; Terre Haute & Ind. Ry. Co. v. Struble, 109. U.S. 381. . . The. public has an interest in ......
  • Dimick v. Schiedt
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • January 7, 1935
    ...98 U.S. 440, 445, 25 L.Ed. 168; Railroad Co. v. Fraloff, supra, 100 U.S. 31, 25 L.Ed. 531; Terre Haute & Indiana Ry. Co. v. Struble, 109 U.S. 381, 384, 385, 3 S.Ct. 270, 27 L.Ed. 970; Fishburn v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co., 137 U.S. 60, 61, 11 S.Ct. 8, 34 L.Ed. 585; Ayers v. Wats......
  • Hansen v. Harris
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oregon
    • December 19, 1933
  • Yarber v. Chicago & A. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Illinois
    • October 26, 1908
    ...Co. v. Young, 5 Cranch, 187, 3 L. Ed. 74;Home Ins. Co. v. Barton, 13 Wall. 603, 20 L. Ed. 708;Terre Haute & Indianapolis Railway Co. v. Struble, 109 U. S. 381, 3 Sup. Ct. 270, 27 L. Ed. 970;Kearney v. Snodgrass, 12 Or. 311, 7 Pac. 309;Miller v. Baker, 20 Pick. (Mass.) 285; Burd v. Dunsdale,......
  • 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