{
  "id": 826353,
  "name": "The Merchants' Despatch Company v. Marcus H. Topping et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Merchants' Despatch Co. v. Topping",
  "decision_date": "1878-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "65",
  "last_page": "66",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "89 Ill. 65"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 162,
    "char_count": 2396,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.518,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.8591662004228935e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3640636963776653
    },
    "sha256": "12eb4928187b5c557af11c89a21bfdb84d497fbbe7fed82c21aa238e08bd7ead",
    "simhash": "1:28d5dfa6043612df",
    "word_count": 427
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:36:47.067630+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "The Merchants\u2019 Despatch Company v. Marcus H. Topping et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Breese\ndelivered the opinion of the Court:\nThis was an action, commenced before a justice of the peace of Madison county, by Topping Bros., partners under that name and style, plaintiffs, and against the Merchants\u2019 Despatch Company, defendant, to recover the value of certain goods delivered to defendant to be carried, one package from New Haven, Connecticut, and one other from Newark, New Jersey, to the plaintiffs, at Alton, in this State. There was a judgment for the plaintiffs, and on appeal to the circuit court, where the cause was tried by the court, without a jury, there were a finding and judgment for the plaintiffs. To reverse this judgment the defendant appeals.\nThe proof is conclusive that the goods were delivered to appellant, a common carrier, in the latter part of the month of September, 1871. This suit was commenced on October 7, 1876, and it is contended by appellant, and it is the only point it makes, the action was barred by the Statute of Limitations. The goods were carried by way of Chicago, and it is claimed they were destroyed by the memorable fire of October 8 and 9, 1871.\u2019 Appellant claims that as the liability of appellant attached on the delivery of the goods to it, the statute began to run from that date, and as five years had elapsed from that date to October 7, 1876, when suit was brought, the cause of action was barred.\nWe are of opinion the Statute of Limitations did not begin to run until a cause of action had accrued to appellees. No cause had accrued when the goods were delivered, but it did accrue on October 8th or 9th, when the goods were destroyed.\nThe case is a plain one for the appellees, and the judgment must be affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Breese"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. J. H. Yager, for the appellant.",
      "Mr. Levi Davis, for the appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "The Merchants\u2019 Despatch Company v. Marcus H. Topping et al.\nLimitation\u2014when the statute begins to run. The Statute of Limitations does not begin to run in favor of a common carrier from the delivery of goods to be carried, but from the time when a cause of action accrues to the owner. So, although goods were shipped more than five years before suit brought by the owner to recover for their loss by fire, but were destroyed within five years before suit, it was held, that the cause of action was not barred.\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Madison county; the Hon. William H. Snyder, Judge, presiding.\nMr. J. H. Yager, for the appellant.\nMr. Levi Davis, for the appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0065-01",
  "first_page_order": 65,
  "last_page_order": 66
}