xt73bk16mf8w_613 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt73bk16mf8w/data/mets.xml https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt73bk16mf8w/data/51w14.dao.xml unknown 35 Cubic Feet 77 boxes archival material 51w14 English University of Kentucky Copyright has not been assigned to the University of Kentucky.  Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company and Lexington and Eastern Railway Company records Railroads -- Appalachian Region -- History. Railroads -- Kentucky -- History. [449] Powers Clothing Co. v. L&N, Perry Quarterly Court text [449] Powers Clothing Co. v. L&N, Perry Quarterly Court 2016 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt73bk16mf8w/data/51w14/Box_59/Folder_9/6380.pdf section false xt73bk16mf8w_613 xt73bk16mf8w IAILEY P. WOOTTON JESSE MORGAN
WOOTTON 8c MORGAN
gitnraegsmhgiam 7M / O / fi K
. HAZARD. KY. ‘
Hazard, Kentucky, l"arch 9th, 1915.
hr. damuel L. Jilson,
Lexington, Kentucky.
near dir:
fie have your letter of the 8th inst., enclosing
papers of Jreight Claim Agent jeger in connection with the
case of Powers clothing Company v. s. 9. Johnson, pending
in Ferry Quarterly court. As the Company never receiveé
these goods, there is certainly no liability, and we will
proceed accordingly. Je will retain all papers for our
files.
Yours very truly,
/ . 7 /
WW f 27 sz/
K/
273/

 ' ' ' r .,,.1. f‘ ‘-..- I
. - LLELJ. or; , 141a, ,
h { . . ' I
521885.938. "00:. uOs'i. (.9 1:13.: {338.31, -
.V:-n r,"::‘.- G H {5“ 'LVCfl'rr‘m ' .
.L.-r... “._,, .. , ..L-...LLU .L “J a .
‘1 _ ’_ M . . ‘ . ,
beat 1 C :.en.
- ‘ lierawith note 00;); Off 121911391" 01‘ the 6th ingtsnt from
—..,. w... . 4.. 5 , . A.,. 4:.. , .,. . ,. J. x . a .9 . "1.,. :.‘ ' " ~ a ., -. .
9:; a ..,;uO; 1.1811 ram: papa“. S 1.11.0.3. v.10 mu uEl'Jlan J... ON 15;0.L{.:1E ‘.ELQLu’l .'.;gfifl'u
':' ..,.. > ' _..-» - ... .“.-M . J- .V- r. ..2 " “ - m r - m. -- - .. ¢
.;egw, sali ‘11».21115r,’ iflidLCflCG w me sum. 1n .\’é-.=3..-»?;7 411.138.? Cami.
" "‘k V..-puny. .'“”? .‘..'-',‘ -': y»... 4" 171‘ ..nv-1—~ ~1- C‘ '2‘ f ‘ ':‘qc‘q'v‘ ‘ T r‘: '17 "‘7‘! 11'1“ “NJ 3“" . '
. 01 . (auxin ,-’ LUL_.I..!.:L\Cx L'nl::lflu,.{..‘y v 1: ha .w ».Ul 1-0.,1‘4 .. 0.. ..L. ,.’. 3...; 5..; L510“-
73.13.33 '..:‘ttention ti: 1:13:12“; Sateixfpfizzrznt in 3:37. iiajiil’fz‘winxfi let‘wr that i‘he
~M _, .,_ .'.”... " 2! ‘ ._ .L‘. ' ‘ ’ - ,‘.‘ .L.: ,‘. -.., ,. ...‘ _- ‘ ,_ .,‘ .l ._ _- ,, .
. ::.}11.;;7-1eufi 1.11m .Lveu 1“, .1113 11mg! ...I. am MRS wave; .m we 3M)5~,f:-.F25:.S_L011
- I :..: -‘ ,. -~ m ., L...‘... ‘.'. . 1. 1, —. .- *' ‘.~ -~ - _
. 40.; me ..- a: .23. _r_:!«-,_u.c.~.;, 1 want: 3.:. ..me can. 0:; na new-93.1319 Lulu 1.113;]
.'.‘. ... '.? .‘..‘” .. ..,. .‘..
on L‘ll"; <.:_x.:.w.(—>::flfz;w. -
, “fevers ‘i;::171;;:‘, -
QIOCEQ
.' J/ a.
' ", 1] cs ‘.']
whnoe-..
,5
\ .’.
r x W “R . -
z/r. »

 _1_\ th/fi
Y . ‘ , ' {:9 x \\ 7 /,
x ; /
Yfgflflfl’fléfs/ZZ/QZ/Cm J/{z/(x Q\fl/if/ i/HM/I-C/A/l/H/ flax/y '
ZAM/V/ // MHz/mm, ’—
/, egg/£47,.lzv.:l/mm: K , 7 ' .,74/ ,2
fl/””““fi//‘€Qflyézfpwwfi ~44%09&W4é%{§%) March 6th,1915. _
Mr. s, M. Wilson, we’d/70V M'
Counsel, L.&E.R.CO.,
Lexington, Kentucky. '
Dear Sir:-
Referring to yours of the 12th instant enclosing .
docket report, cepy of answer and cross-petition against the L. ‘
8c E, R, Co. in the case of Powers Clothing Company v. s . B. John- '
1 son, Perry Quarterly Court. I am handing you herewith Freight
Claim Agent Seger's letter, dated March 2nd, toeether with enclofvo p
sures referred to therein.
// You will note from the attached papers that the Y
a shipment involved in the litigation referred to was never in the
Y 3 possession of the L. & N. R, Co. .
' ; Yours truly, )
a 6} %;), z/c mg.“ ,5 E), A) ))}/
Assistant District Attorney
JJD/w ‘

 .3.”:‘LEY F' WOOTTON JESSE MORGAN
6' WOOTTON & MORGAN
: ~ Aiintttu‘gs at 71:21am
HAZARD»’ _ > '_ ‘
'Gemtlemen: _ ; ». ' , . ” “-
. ' ” ' Referring to yourfi of teeent &ate; in reference to suit ’
» _ in ?6rry_fluarterly paurfi, Qf 3owers Clothing Co. v, S. B. Johnson; 2
' i; which SH’S. Jfihnson has £3126 a firess—Fetition'against the ,
‘. V _Company, I herewith enclOsa copy of a-lotter'of the 15th_ingtant' '
' .- nifigt raceiveé from Mr. Echwell, which furnifiheé infcrmation whidh
vheuli Enable mg to aefeat the claim againSt the Compafly. _
' ‘. ‘_ Ifi afiiitian to this.in£0rmmtiong I call your atteution
. - to certain auihurities which may be ofi service, inafimuch»as'fhis ’ ‘
*‘ aypearw to haVQ been.un~inter$tute shipmenfiw 'I quoéa from a ~ ,
circular-letter Gf‘hhe i sistant Eifitricfi fittorney,\unéer fiate of'
' Junumxy 25, 1915, an followa « '/ , -~
. - "While you are prQbably familiar with ail 0? them, far ready
, referaaee, cares in which are caugtru¢fi plovigions of bills of 5
, . I lufiiag ani livesLJCX cgntracfia are cita& below: ’ = I
’ v - 7 Adams Ex regs Gunman? v. 'Croninzer ’ 226 US 1"
' ‘2 J‘- )I .‘. L ' .'. i
V‘ . C.B.& Q.fi.00. V4. klller - - 22; US 513
‘ vb Eco-03.213. — .v. .uatta ‘ , 229113319 ..
. 7. u.K.&T.R.Co¢ . v. Harfiiman fires. - j.227 US_05E
Sellsafiawgo Exicc, v. Haiman—Earcus Co.-‘ 227.3.S.4 9
“ Olegg - v. St3&flfl R.Co, 1 203 Fefi 971 '
. 1.233;.60. ‘ v. Eiofrv'arei ' - 152; Tim—308‘
‘ ” CEOfiT? 8.00,. v.- Rankin 153 Ky. £30 '
_ GSQ&T? 1.00u ’ - v6 \Bodfl . . 153 Ky.' 45
In the absve cases it is held that an interstate.caxrier may by a
" fair, Open anfi reuaonwhle agreement, limit the amount racoverable
A , bg'tha Shipyer to an agreea value mafie for the puryoee of obtaining
_ the lover of two or more rates yropartioned to the amount Sf thfi*riék.
‘ 'In the following caeag the clause'of shipping cottract

 7 . 7.7.7 411:: #2., . ' . . 7 - 1 _ ~ 2/16/154 . , 7
' . “ 'requiring notice of fiamage as a condition yreeeéent to the maintenance '
Of an action to recover damages is uphele as reesdnable. -
7 17.16.57 11.00. v. 'Harrimen Bros. 7 227 70.7.: 657 '
» Clegg v. 3711.57.33 317.530... 20:2 17:36: 9:71. . 7
' iicElVain - 7 . V. (10 , 150 SW [(3634, ~
. 308631311 v: I CBCI‘CW R" '73“). '. 1E"? :3?! {>37 . .
‘ ' Owens~fie£1nney 'V. L&N R300. 57 Kg. e26 . -
Beware. i. Callahan V.. .laG.E.Ce. . _ 103. 31:53, 783
' ?rovieion of bill 0f laaing limiting value cf houSehold: 7.»
up A' . 5:730:13 uphelfl in A. ' ’ ' . ' 3
. 7 ‘ - ' 3,0.801103u3'o. V. Carl ' 3’2? ’US- 5 ‘7 ’ ‘- "_
7 _ _»Grt.fior.3.00. v. O‘Connor 232 US 5 7 7 3 . 7_
’f- 7 .' . »It wee hela that certified eepy of tariffi and elassifiee~
. I tions could be’ueed ae evidence in ’ . ‘ .
1 IaC.;.CO. _v. Henderson Elevator Co., 226 U;8.44l."
. Very truly yours, 7 :f7 . _ .
- enc. . ,' . . ’
- ant/a. 5 . ~ -7 ’ _ 3 _ - 7'.
_ ' 7‘ 3 Couneel.rl ‘”
i I . . >1 , - > » I ' I I. ‘ '_K‘ ‘

 _ ,-‘ 944-4466
. , ‘5“ .
1‘ ~ ' ./ ’7 "I, , \\' "v
. ,._l />- /«, , . f //1 , ./ /, , ‘ / / fl/ / , 4.
\ .\ .~ K: ll/y/fll/l 772M ..-~//./.~_,////// [M /////M7 Q1777 W77,
\fl. ‘ // , *7 A 7 , (I ‘V K
- ‘ 14277277 ,1 fllfl) '
I I,. , ’ / )1 _ , , { ,
AZQQAé/kmmfi/ ;/// . // /ngV/
77275777 Q .. 777/W727“, % -
/ K/
- .,L /5 /fi’ February 15th, 1915‘
u ,
3111‘ . S. -..'.. ”,'.‘ils 01'; ,
Lexingvon, Ky.
Ds~r Sir:-
Ysur lebcar of'the lifih go Jhe Assistant District ,
Attorney in I gard to ;he Sui: Q? Ubu Powers Slashilg Jowpany vs.
, “WT mgfi._J;d”‘
‘_‘ .,_ T , , /'¢}' {.:1}. 7"“ 3‘ .» .A‘ 5, , I L. {‘1 I“ filth-“‘“’"
9.:.oohnsoni f.a->>; g wz¢ww 3‘2“ H«?wflx;5 u,
(.’5 ', 4
Our Asap? :t Lfil Juxcujon snice, Snag the shlyneut
referred to, one case of clcubiug corsignei no 3.5.Jchxson at
Shfivies, was covered by Len York to 1;; JHLCEiQN Iaybill YX 257
Aungfi fist, 1912, anfi Shut uhe shiymcna ii‘ nay ncvc froL his
susdion on accounx of the eomxecyirg ljye no; funlishing sufficient
wrepay do move it to : non—zjane; sfisuion, Chavies =t ch 3 time
beirg a non-agency 5: tion. Our Agata advises furuhor that
Lkl Junction fio Greenup,ly. wayhill $0.15 of April 11th, 1914,
. ,..“ ~11}. 1 Av .’3' .'I A.J.W,.:., .. ‘.J— 1.. -‘ ’“' <1 7 ~~~~ , —. r-'-. "v 74-. ”n .\14 ‘\
CuVi:.Lc; up}: UUx‘. OI. LLLV b1,1_njl‘g Ski-mu uU L..LJongJLJJ‘l Cow e UWSJ. Mule ;Oube.
It was eviflently forvarded there for "01¢ Eorge" sale.
. The billing r~ference given above is C.& O. The L.¢ E.
, was no L Cxir‘ec Ely cancel-Led in any of 12110 L’ransac tions. If 1411838 is
to be any recovery I presumw is vill be frat U19 3.& O.
Y¢urw uruly,
z) /—\ v
V_f/ \ ~\(_,A-r<)
/ '\ ‘
k\“ 'Ir /,,/\\\fi/_ \// ~_- . r
“~;\1«:;11«*=§\%3.x >,/ 37 ‘ wk“ ~ ~ ,_
73 \ h/
F‘ _ ‘ :‘ T * ' -q
uy MT.C.i.ucoLLan.

 “ . I I I . .. . II I '
_' I 4.< . I . » . I " 4 I . .. Retinal? 12, 1915. -
» ‘ in. C . If. fisherman. ‘ ‘ ., I 44
. . _ » 4 Louisville, Ky. ’ ‘ - ' I' ' - '
’ floor 81?: I . V ‘ I ‘
~ §?O?3er3 Glowing Cemgnny v. S. 3.50m1e0n.
\ _ ‘ / ~ _ W. W I“
’I ‘ 35.32421 herewith ennloeed .‘:?eeket Kayne one tony of I _
. mower one Ureee ;é’etition against the 3:4 43:; 3;,fi1ezi in the . .
- ' ‘ , . . letter of > ‘
. Keri“; 'JLiuerterly Court Jammy 23;}, 1935;; also copy. oration 9th
’ I inotent from Sony. Wootton 52;» win tranno’itting seic‘ ’eeyies.
' . -- ' item-‘55 truly, ' »I‘ , 7 - _
. ' , ene . . ' - , ' ' . ; .,
‘ I I CLE‘LLC/d t 4 , H I 'I . « I t
‘ £232" to If. A. Liefiowell, iinnmg-er,‘ ' .
P Zflexriiigton, Ky. _ I - Counsel. ‘ , . ' ‘-

 \ a“); '1
. ;;ILE\;}?J‘{IV'OOI;T N JESSE MOPGAN
M,‘Woér ONSHWORGAN
I, ."1 ‘.;?xééféznrya art “gain
?T.'» lf'iAZARD' KY~ rebruary 9, 1915.
2: .‘5? "“‘
x
J: R > ' A
Liz! o b 0 .LL. H’llSO 1'1 , _
Lexington, hy.
Dear sir:
Enclosed find copy of answer and cross petition
against L. a n. nailway Uomyany in the case of rowers
Clothing company vs. 5. B. Johnson.
‘ he should like to haVe come information about
;fthis matter in order to make deIense for the railroad
i company. dohnson says that his understanding is that
. the goods were shipped and came as far as L. a a. Junction,
V and that the L. a n. refused to bring them on up because
the freight was not prepaid. Uhavies, the point of
destination, is a prepay station. if that is true, it
seems that the plaintiff should lose out.
rlease have an investigation of this matter made
and let us have the in:ormation.
Very truly yours,
KR \\
7 ~ w
//7,v“7}*(,/{/z7“/’\, ?/ /.. - ' ' " (“'“'
DJ: ‘.‘.'/c

 — j(/& «(A , 3.17 (,1 ..,” ”X 7 , /7// 9, @
o 1‘ l)
PERRY QUAthRLY UOUnT. .
' POWEnS CLOthNu ComPAmY, nTC., ELALNTL£J80
VS. nUSWER AnD ChUSS rEQITION. .
S. .o. J Oih‘tON , LEa'n11D11li-1T.
The defendant, S. B. Johnson, for answer to
the plaintiff's petition, denies that on the 9th day
of August, 1912, the plaintiff sold or delivered to ‘
this defendant at his Special instance and request or at
all merchandise of the value of p125.55 or any other
_ amount, except as hereinafter stated, or that the par-
, ticulars of any such alleged sale are stated in an
itemized statement filed with the plaintiff's petition
and he denies that said alleged account or any account
was due from this defendant to plaintiff on the lst
day 01 hecember, 1912, or is now due or owing to the
plaintiff or wholly unpaid.
ii.
for further answer and defense herein the
defendant states that on the 24th day of July, 1912, he
purchased from the plaintiff through and by their sales-
man and agent, one a. 3. Lovelace, a bill of clothing
amounting to 9122.50, as Shown by exhibit “A" filed with
the depositions of u.rike rowers for plaintiffs and ac-
cording to the terms of the sale and purchase of said
bill of goods, as shown by said exhibit ”A", the said
goods were shipped to ohavies, nentucky, a station on the
Lexington a eastern nailway Company, in rerry county, V
nentuoky, and it was further condition upon which Said 1
purchase was made and a part of the sale and agreed to by t

 Q
9.

the partieS'mereto that the plaintiff would prepay the
freight upon said package of goods from the place iron
which it was dipped to Uhavies, Kentucky, and he states
that the purchase and sale and the negotiations thereabout ’ .
were made between the parties at chavies; that said Qavies
station was at the time and had been for a long time
before a prepaid station, that is the railroad company
through and by its regulations required and had required '
the freight to be paid in advance at the time the shipment
was made before it would receive and transport the goods
from any point to Uhavies station; that the naierad
Company had no agent at Uhavies at that time and that tnese
facts were known to the salesman, a. W. hovelace, and was
told of all these facts by this defendant, and that in view
of these circumstances the plaintiff and the defendant both
knew that this deiendant would not receive the goods and that
theyvvould not be tranSported by the railroad to Uhavies
unless the entire freight was paid in advance by the shipper,
and this theplaintiff agreed to do and undertook to do as
a part of the trade. as states that it was further a part

. of the trade and agreement as shown by exhibit "A“ herein
that said SOOLS were to be shipped at once; that the defend-

} ant bought said goods especially for his fall trade and for
this reason required them shipped at once and that itwas
only on this condition that he would have bought them at all,

‘ that is that the goods be shipped at once in order that he
may dispose of them in their season which was for fall trade
and that in addition that the shipper, the plaintiff, would
prepay all of the ireight to Uhavies. he states thatin
violation of said agreement the plaintiff failed and refused
to ship said goods at once and did not ship them for dmost

 O,
-.
thirty days thereafter, and that the plaintiff failed and
refused to prepay the freight, as it had agreed to do and ,
that by reason of the plaintiff's failure to ship at once
and by the delay in shipment and by the plaintiff‘s failure . '
i to prepay the freights the defendant was deprived of having
the goods delivered to him at all. He states that said
sale and purchase was made with the agreement and under-
standing that it was subject to acceptance or rejections
by the plaintiff when it reached its place of business at
hnoxville, iennessee, and that saidorder would be immediately
accepted or rejected and that in either event the plaintiff
agreed to notify the defendant, but the plaintiff failed to
notify the defendant of its action and that this defendant
' never knew that the order had been accepted until about
six months thereafter or in January of the following year
and that this defendant did not Know that said bill of
. goods had been shipped to him or that the plaintiff had ‘
attempted to ship the same to him until about six months
after the order was taken and only learned that by a
statement rendered to him by the plaintiffs demanding pay
on their account. he states that after hezmceived that in—
formation he inmediately set about to try to locate the
goods and as a result of his investigations he learned from
the officials of the railroad company that it had never béen
delivered at Uhavies, and that he was unable to locate it;
_ that about a year after that time he finally succeeded in
locating them at a Station on the hexingtnn a Eastern nailroad
known as h. a m. Junction and that he was informed by the
officers and agents of said railroad company and he therefore '
charges that it WaS held by Said railroad company at Said
point and stepped in transient on account of the fact that

 O
-
the freight had not been prepaid upon it by the shipper
and he was further informed and charges that at that
time the said goods had been disposed of by the railroad
company in accordance with its rules and regulations of I '
disposing of unclaimed freight. he states that it was a
part of the trade and the agreement between the said o.J.
Lovelace, agent and salesman of plaintiff, and this
defendant, that in the event the bill was accepted and
the goods shipped that the plaintiff Would send to him .
the bill of lading showing the shipment of said goods to
this defendant at uhavies and showing that all fieight
from the point from which it was shipped to Uhavies had
been paid in full, and that the plaintiff failed and re-

} fused to send tne said bill of lading or any statement or
notification that the goods had been shipped and that this
defendant never knew or had any knowledge that said goods

I had been shipped until more than six months thereafter and
until the season for his market for said goods had passed
and that at the time of the trade he informed the plaintiff
through and by its agent and salesman, Lovelace, and it was
well known by him that the goods were sold and bought for the
defendant's fall trade and would be worthless to him unless
received at once to be used and sold in the fall market,
of 1912 in which the goods were ordered, and he states that
by the failure of the plaintiff to prepay the freight and

' its failure to send him the bill of lading and by failing
to notify him that the goods had been shipped the plaintiff
put it out of his power to procure a delivery of the goods
to the defendant if he had otherwise been able to do so and '
that by reason of the plaintiff's action and its failure to
act and its failure to carry out its part of the contract

 O
‘-
there was no sale at all of said goods to this defendant. _
III.
For cross petition against the Lexington &
Eastern Railway Company the defendant states that the
Lexingtgn & Eastern flailway Company is a corporation, p
created, organized and existing under and by virtue of
the laws of the State of hentuchy, with power to contract
and be contracted with, sue and be sued in its corporate
name.
The defendant, 5. B. Johnson, for cross petition

against the Lexington a Eastern hailway Company, states
that he purchased or contracted with the Powers Clothing
Company for the goods named in plaintiff's petition, in
the way and manner and as set out in the second paragraph
herein; that the plaintiff, rowers Clothing Company, shipped
or consigned said goods to this defendant, addressed to him
at Chavies, hentuchy, a station upon 3the Lexington a Eastern
hailway Company, in Perry County; that Said goods received
by the Lexington & Eastern nailway Company from the connecting
line or lines of railroad which connect it with the point
from which said goods were shipped, which Has New York, New
York; that in regular course of business and transportation
said goods were delivered to the Lexington & Eastern hailway

’ Company at its station known as "L a E eunction" for trans-
portation to this defendant at Chavies, Kentucky, and that
it was received by it for transportation and that after having
received said shipment it negligently failed and refused to

I deliver said goods to its station at Chavies or to this
defendant at all, but on the contrary it held and retained said
shipment of goods at its station at L & E Junction both from
this defendant, the consignee and from the consignor the I
plaintiff; that the Lexington & Eastern Railway Company is

 .3' .V
engaged generally in carrying all kinds of freights as a
common carrier :rom its station L & E Junction and beyond
to and beyond Chavies, Kentucky, and was such at all times
herein stated. he states that in the event the plaintiff‘s
contention as set out in its petition against this defendant
should prevail that the Lexington & Eastern Railway Company
by its negligently failing to deliver said goods has damaged
this defendant in the sum of e125.55, and he states that it
is a necessary defendant to this action in order that the
rights of this defendant may be protected and this case fully
adjudicated.

WEEHEEUhE he prays that the plaintiff‘s petition
be dismissed and that it take nothing thereby, for his cost

- and all proper relief, and further that in the event the
plaintiff should recover any judgment against this defeniant
for a125.55 or any other sum or amount that this defendant

. recover judgment against the Lexington & Eastern Railway
Company for a like anount, for his cost and all prOper
relief.

J. E. Johnson
Attorney for defendant and
cross petitioner.

Affiant so B.Johnson, states that the statements
contained in the feregoing answer and cross petition are
true as he believes.

_ Subscribed and sworn to before me by 3.3. Johnson,
this ___ day of , 1915.