{
  "id": 2974572,
  "name": "Robert B. Cochrane and Luman H. Cochrane, trading as Cochrane Brokerage Company, Plaintiffs in Error, v. Chicago Great Western Railroad Company, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Cochrane v. Chicago Great Western Railroad",
  "decision_date": "1916-05-12",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 21,160",
  "first_page": "469",
  "last_page": "471",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "199 Ill. App. 469"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 235,
    "char_count": 3820,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.522,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.380125665320789e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3929024433470832
    },
    "sha256": "227cf1220a9aa89c8fdcb7a0fbaecb6a3b2c9b165a7a892a8ceabd3b3d66554c",
    "simhash": "1:c169450640a79859",
    "word_count": 628
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:51:30.955611+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Robert B. Cochrane and Luman H. Cochrane, trading as Cochrane Brokerage Company, Plaintiffs in Error, v. Chicago Great Western Railroad Company, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice O\u2019Connor\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice O\u2019Connor"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Stewart Keed Brown, for plaintiffs in error.",
      "Winston, Payne, Strawn & Shaw, for defendant in error; John Barton Payne and Frank H. Towner, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Robert B. Cochrane and Luman H. Cochrane, trading as Cochrane Brokerage Company, Plaintiffs in Error, v. Chicago Great Western Railroad Company, Defendant in Error.\nGen. No. 21,160.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nError to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Robert H. Scott, Judge, presiding Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1915.\nReversed and remanded.\nOpinion filed May 12, 1916.\nStatement of the Case.\nAction by Robert B. Cochrane and Lnman H. Cochrane, trading as Cochrane Brokerage Company, plaintiffs, against the Chicago Great Western Railroad Company, a corporation, defendant, to recover for damage to a shipment of pears. To reverse a judgment for defendant, plaintiffs prosecute a writ of error.\nPlaintiffs\u2019 statement of claim alleged, in substance, the shipment of the pears by the plaintiffs over defendant\u2019s road from Kansas City, Missouri, to Marshalltown, Iowa; that the pears were in first-class merchantable condition at the time of shipment; that upon their arrival at destination they were found to be in bad condition arid unmerchantable; and that plaintiffs suffered damages in the sum of $1,000.\nDefendant\u2019s affidavit of merits admitted the shipment of the pears by the plaintiffs over the defendant\u2019s road, but denied that any loss or damage was sustained to the shipment while in the possession, custody or control of the defendant; denied that, at the time of shipment, the pears were in a first-class merchantable condition, and alleged that the same were in a damaged and unmerchantable condition when delivered to defendant for shipment. Defendant further denied that it was indebted to the plaintiffs in any sum or sums whatever, by reason of the matters and things alleged in plaintiffs\u2019 statement of claim.\nThe evidence tended to show that the pears, when loaded at Kansas City, were in good condition; that the car in which they were loaded, during the trip to Marshalltown, was not properly ventilated; that when the car arrived at Marshalltown the pears were in a damaged condition; that the amount of damage suffered by the plaintiffs by reason of the'manner in which the pears were transported was $293.55.\nAt the close of the plaintiffs\u2019 case, the court found the issues for the defendant on the ground that it was incumbent upon the plaintiffs to produce a bill of lading, or satisfactorily account for its absence. The defendant contended that, as this was an interstate shipment, and governed by the Federal law which required the issuance of a bill of lading, in the absence of proof to the contrary, it will be presumed that a bill of lading was issued when the shipment was delivered to the defendant; and that it was therefore necessary for the plaintiffs to have either produced the bill of lading or satisfactorily accounted for its absence before they could recover.\nStewart Keed Brown, for plaintiffs in error.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Carriers\u2014when production of hill of lading or accounting therefor unnecessary. In an action for damages to an interstate shipment of fruit caused by defendant carrier\u2019s negligence where the plaintiff bases his claim on an oral contract of shipment, it is not incumbent upon him to produce or account for the absence of a bill of lading before he can recover.\n2. Carriers, \u00a7 139 \u2014when evidence sufficient to establish prima facie case for negligent loss of fruit. In an action for damages to an interstate shipment of fruit caused by defendant carrier\u2019s negligence, evidence examined and held to make out a prima facie case for the plaintiff.\nWinston, Payne, Strawn & Shaw, for defendant in error; John Barton Payne and Frank H. Towner, of counsel.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0469-01",
  "first_page_order": 491,
  "last_page_order": 493
}