Southern Express Co. v. Meyer

125 S.W. 642, 94 Ark. 103, 1910 Ark. LEXIS 382
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided February 14, 1910·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Wood, J.,

(after stating the facts). As appellee, under the evidence, had no opportunity to ship under any other than a contract of limited liability, he was entitled to recover, under the decision of this court in St. Louis & S. F. Rd. Co. v. Wells, 81 Ark. 469.

As the contract under which these shipments were made limited the liability of appellant to loss occurring while in its possession, and limited the damages to the amount stated in the contract, it was void in these particulars, and appellee was also entitled to recover under the doctrine of this court announced in St. Louis S. W. Ry. Co. v. Grayson, 89 Ark. 154; Kansas City S. Ry. Co. v. Carl, 91 Ark. 97, and Smeltzer v. St. Louis & S. F. Rd. Co., 158 Fed. Rep. 649. See also Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Miles, 92 Ark. 573.

Affirmed.

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

Southern Express Co. v. Meyer, 125 S.W. 642, 94 Ark. 103, 1910 Ark. LEXIS 382 (Ark. 1910).

125 S.W. 642 (Southern Express Co. v. Meyer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States Express Co. v. Cohn
157 S.W. 144 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1913)
St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Pape
140 S.W. 265 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1911)