Skip to content


Adams Express Co. Vs. Kentucky - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number206 U.S. 138
AppellantAdams Express Co.
RespondentKentucky
Excerpt:
adams express co. v. kentucky - 206 u.s. 138 (1907) u.s. supreme court adams express co. v. kentucky, 206 u.s. 138 (1907) adams express company v. kentucky no. 583 argued april 17, 18, 1907 decided may 13, 1907 206 u.s. 138 error to the court of appeals of the state of kentucky syllabus decided on authority of adams express co. v. kentucky, ante, p. 206 u. s. 129 . the facts are stated in the opinion. mr. justice brewer delivered the opinion of the court. this case differs from the preceding in the fact that it was tried by the court without a jury. in all other respects, it is page 206 u. s. 139 substantially the same. there was the same averment in the indictment, and, more than.....
Judgment:
Adams Express Co. v. Kentucky - 206 U.S. 138 (1907)
U.S. Supreme Court Adams Express Co. v. Kentucky, 206 U.S. 138 (1907)

Adams Express Company v. Kentucky

No. 583

Argued April 17, 18, 1907

Decided May 13, 1907

206 U.S. 138

ERROR TO THE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF KENTUCKY

Syllabus

Decided on authority of Adams Express Co. v. Kentucky, ante, p. 206 U. S. 129 .

The facts are stated in the opinion.

MR. JUSTICE BREWER delivered the opinion of the Court.

This case differs from the preceding in the fact that it was tried by the court without a jury. In all other respects, it is

Page 206 U. S. 139

substantially the same. There was the same averment in the indictment, and, more than that, there was an express stipulation made between counsel, pending the trial, in these words:

"It is further agreed at this point that the whisky about which the witness testified was delivered by the Adams Express Company and received by it in its office in Cincinnati in the usual course of business as a common carrier, and carried by it to Barbourville, Kentucky, by the method commonly known as C.O.D."

There is nothing, therefore, to distinguish this case in principle from the preceding, and the same judgment will be entered in this as in that.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN dissented. See p. 206 U. S. 141 , post.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //