Little Rock & Fort Smith Railway Co. v. Odom

38 S.W. 339, 63 Ark. 326, 1896 Ark. LEXIS 294
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedDecember 19, 1896
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 38 S.W. 339 (Little Rock & Fort Smith Railway Co. v. Odom) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Little Rock & Fort Smith Railway Co. v. Odom, 38 S.W. 339, 63 Ark. 326, 1896 Ark. LEXIS 294 (Ark. 1896).

Opinion

Wood, J.,

(after stating the facts.) Independent of contract, appellants were under no duty or obligation to transport appellee’s cattle beyond their termini. Packard v. Taylor, 35 Ark. 402. There is nothing to show that they had assumed that relation to the public by reason of any usage or the character of their business. Then, since appellants were not, by law, common carriers as to these cattle at the time of the alleged conversion, their liability depends solely upon their contract with appellee. Piedmont Mfg. Co. v. C. & G. R. Co., 19 S. C. 353; S. C. 16 Am. & Eng. R. Cases, 194; 3 Wood, Railways, sec. 452a.

The contract was for through transportation from Clarksville, Ark., to Checotah, I. T. But the twelfth paragraph expressly exempts the Missouri Pacific Railway Company from liability “for anything beyond” its line “excepting to protect the through rate of freight named therein.” Appellee is bound by the contract. St. L., I. M. & S. R. Co. v. Weakly, 50 Ark. 397. The cases of Railway Co. v. Cravens and Railway Co. v. Spann, 57 Ark. 112 and 127, relied upon by appellee, are not analogous. The court erred in holding appellants liable as for conversion.

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Southern Pacific Co. v. Larrimore
190 P. 564 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1920)
Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Slaughter
106 S.W. 208 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1907)
Hartley v. St. Louis, Keokuk & North Western Railroad
89 N.W. 88 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1902)
Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis Railway Co. v. Sharp
40 S.W. 781 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
38 S.W. 339, 63 Ark. 326, 1896 Ark. LEXIS 294, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/little-rock-fort-smith-railway-co-v-odom-ark-1896.