Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Gallup

Supreme Court of Kansas

Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Gallup

88 P. 1134, 74 Kan. 900, 1906 Kan. LEXIS 193

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedDecember 8, 1906

DocketNo. 14,802

StatusPublished

This text of 88 P. 1134 (Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Gallup) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Gallup, 88 P. 1134, 74 Kan. 900, 1906 Kan. LEXIS 193 (kan 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Damages were awarded to Gallup for the negligence of the railway company in failing promptly to deliver cattle shipped from Chetopa to Kansas City. The award was based on the loss of market on the day the cattle should have been delivered and other losses resulting from the delay. The railway company contends that the shipper did not comply with the conditions of the contract under which th'e shipment was made. The contract in this case is substantially the same as' that involved in Railway Co. v. Fry, ante, p. 546. Under the authority of that case Gallup was entitled to recover notwithstanding he had failed to give the notice mentioned in the contract.

Since the written- contract does not apply to the damages awarded, the instruction upon that contract of which complaint is made is immaterial.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Per Curiam:

Damages were awarded to Gallup for the negligence of the railway company in failing promptly to deliver cattle shipped from Chetopa to Kansas City. The award was based on the loss of market on the day the cattle should have been delivered and other losses resulting from the delay. The railway company contends that the shipper did not comply with the conditions of the contract under which th'e shipment was made. The contract in this case is substantially the same as' that involved in Railway Co. v. Fry, ante, p. 546. Under the authority of that case Gallup was entitled to recover notwithstanding he had failed to give the notice mentioned in the contract.

Since the written- contract does not apply to the damages awarded, the instruction upon that contract of which complaint is made is immaterial.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 P. 1134, 74 Kan. 900, 1906 Kan. LEXIS 193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/missouri-kansas-texas-railway-co-v-gallup-kan-1906.