Peterson v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.

45 N.W. 573, 80 Iowa 92, 1890 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 174
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedMay 15, 1890
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 45 N.W. 573 (Peterson v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Peterson v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co., 45 N.W. 573, 80 Iowa 92, 1890 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 174 (iowa 1890).

Opinion

Rothkook, C. J.

— I. In -the month of October, 1886, W. D. Peterson, the husband of the plaintiff, made a ■contract at Davenport, in this state, for transportation for himself and family from Davenport to Los Angéles, ■California. He purchased three through tickets, for which he paid the agent of the Rock Island Company the ¡áum of two hundred and- fifty dollars. He had certain traveling trunks, which were checked by the Rock Island Company to Kansas City. The tickets were what is known as “ coupon tickets.” The first coupon was good for transportation over the Rock Island road to Kansas City ; the next coupon was for passage over the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Pe railroad from Kansas City to its junction with the Atlantic and Pacific railway, and on the last-named road to its junction with the California Southern railroad; and the last coupon was for passage over the last-named road to Los Angeles. The following is a copy of one of the tickets purchased -by said Peterson at Davenport, with the last coupon .attached .thereto:

[94]*94

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

Related

Andreas & Son v. Hempy
276 N.W. 791 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1937)
Golwitzer v. Hummel
206 N.W. 254 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1925)
Armstrong v. Cavanagh
183 Iowa 140 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1918)
Carter v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.
125 N.W. 94 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1910)
McGuire v. Great Northern Ry. Co.
153 F. 434 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Iowa, 1907)
Ingram v. Dailey
98 N.W. 627 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1904)
Ames v. Southern Pacific Co.
75 P. 310 (California Supreme Court, 1904)
Hartley v. St. Louis, Keokuk & North Western Railroad
89 N.W. 88 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1902)
Clement, Bane & Co. v. Drybread
78 N.W. 235 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1899)
American Contract Co. v. Bullen Bridge Co.
46 P. 138 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1896)
Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Berryman
2 Ind. App. 640 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1894)
Pouilin v. Canadian Pac. Ry. Co.
47 F. 858 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan, 1891)
Davis v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.
49 N.W. 77 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1891)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
45 N.W. 573, 80 Iowa 92, 1890 Iowa Sup. LEXIS 174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peterson-v-chicago-rock-island-pacific-railway-co-iowa-1890.