Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co. v. BosworthAnnotate this Case
179 U.S. 442 (1900)
U.S. Supreme Court
Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co. v. Bosworth, 179 U.S. 442 (1900)
Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway Company v. Bosworth
Argued October 24-25, 1899
Decided December 17, 1900
179 U.S. 442
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
This case having been argued with No. 12, ante,179 U. S. 415, at the same time and by the same counsel, the decision of the court in that case is followed in this.
The case is stated in the opinion of the court.
MR. JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.
The decision of the controversy presented in this record is controlled by the principles announced in the opinion just delivered in Huntting Elevator Co. v. Bosworth, number 12 of this term. The claim of the railroad company was for the value of certain cars, admittedly owned by it, which had been received by the Peoria Company at various times on and prior to October 28, 1894, from a connecting carrier, upon shipments of barley from various points to commission merchants in St. Louis, the cars, except in one or two instances, being routed on the waybills to East St. Louis. The cars so taken by the Peoria Company were deposited on the tracks at East St. Louis set apart for the use of the Peoria Company under the circumstances disclosed in the opinion in the Huntting Elevator Company case, and while awaiting orders from the consignees for further movement, were destroyed in the fire of October 28, 1894. The circuit court entered a decree in favor of the railroad company, but this decree was reversed by the circuit court of appeals.
For the reasons stated in the opinion in the Huntting Elevator Company case,
The decree of the circuit court of appeals must be reversed, and the decree of the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Illinois affirmed.
Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.