Court Opinion

ID: 8310617
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-10-17 13:47:51.781705+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:44:42.330028
License: Public Domain

Treat, J.,
(orally.) In the matter of the intervening petition of the Hannibal Water Company, according to the terms of the contract submitted to the court, it appears that an arrangement was made between the intervenor and the Missouri Pacific Eailroad for tlio supply of water, determined by the provisions of said contract. There was no authority on the part of the Missouri Pacific Eailroad to sublet or furnish supplies to other parties. It having done so, and received from the respondent in this case that amount of money, it should refund the same, for the value of the water supplied belongs to the intervenor, and not to the Missouri Pacific.