{
  "id": 1538800,
  "name": "Midland Valley Railroad Company v. Horton",
  "name_abbreviation": "Midland Valley Railroad v. Horton",
  "decision_date": "1914-03-16",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "125",
  "last_page": "126",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "112 Ark. 125"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "72 Ark. 357",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1505569
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/72/0357-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "81 Ark. 429",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1530645
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/81/0429-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "94 Ark. 324",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1545354
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/94/0324-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 183,
    "char_count": 2359,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.514,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.809691169799155e-08,
      "percentile": 0.49659555441263176
    },
    "sha256": "e072540d536efcdf85d2c4467f04196a71a3da7b52db3fef005c905252d765d0",
    "simhash": "1:3678e506cfc2763c",
    "word_count": 394
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:49:03.002736+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Midland Valley Railroad Company v. Horton."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Wood, J.\nThe appellee sued appellant, alleging that he was a passenger, having procured a ticket entitling him to passage on appellant\u2019s train from Fort Smith to Williams, Okla., and that with this ticket in his possession he appeared at the train of appellant at its station in Fort Smith and offered and proposed to enter said train \u201cwhen the employee and agent of appellant illegally and wrongfully refused to allow appellee to enter the car and with force and violence prevented appellee from entering the train.\u201d The trial resulted in a judgment for the sum of $3.75, and upon the motion of appellee judgment was also entered in his favor against appellant for $25 attorney\u2019s fee to be paid as part of the costs. The appellant appealed from the judgment allowing the attorney\u2019s fee.\nSection 6621 of Kirby\u2019s Digest provides that: \u201cIn all actions at law or suits in equity against any railroad company * # * for the violation of any law regulating the transportation of freight or passengers by any such railroad, if the plaintiff recover in any such suit or action he shall also recover a reasonable attorney\u2019s fee, to be taxed as part of the costs.\u201d\nThis court has held that the above statute applies only to actions for the violation of statutory provisions regulating the transportation of freight and passengers. St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co. v. Evans, 94 Ark. 324; St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co. v. Knight, 81 Ark. 429; Kansas City So. Ry. Co. v. Marx, 72 Ark. 357.\nThe cause of action alleged in the complaint is not based upon the violation of any statutory provision regulating the transportation of passengers.\nThe judgment for attorney\u2019s fee is therefore erroneous and it is reversed and remanded with directions to annul the judgment allowing an attorney\u2019s fee.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Wood, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Edgar A. de Meules and Sol. H. Kauffman, for appellant.",
      "No briefs filed for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Midland Valley Railroad Company v. Horton.\nOpinion delivered March 16, 1914.\nRailroads \u2014 injury to passenger or freight \u2014 attorney\u2019s fees. \u2014 Where the cause of action in a suit against a railroad company is not based upon the violation of some statutory provision regulating the transportation of passengers or freight, the plaintiff is not entitled to recover an attorney\u2019s fee, under Kirby\u2019s Digest, \u00a7 6621.\nAppeal from Sebastian Circuit Court, Fort Smith District; Daniel Eon, Judge;\nreversed.\nEdgar A. de Meules and Sol. H. Kauffman, for appellant.\nNo briefs filed for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0125-01",
  "first_page_order": 141,
  "last_page_order": 142
}