Steamboat Crystal Palace v. Vanderpool
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
APREAL PROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court. Rep. If the boat and owners are legally liable to compensate appellee for his loss it must be upon tbe principle which renders inn-keepers responsible, or by the rigid rules applicable to common carriers. It is supposed that the boat is not responsible as an inn-keeper would be. The boat is not required to obtain a license to entertain.
Read the full summary
APREAL PROM LOUISVILLE CHANCERY COURT. The facts of the case are stated in the opinion of the Court. Rep. If the boat and owners are legally liable to compensate appellee for his loss it must be upon tbe principle which renders inn-keepers responsible, or by the rigid rules applicable to common carriers. It is supposed that the boat is not responsible as an inn-keeper would be. The boat is not required to obtain a license to entertain. It is confined to no particular locality — running- from one commercial point to another, as interest may prompt. Inn-keepers obtain a license for a particular…
1Opinion of the Court
Judge Crenshaw
delivered the opinion of the Court.
Vanderpool having been robbed of his gold watch and chain, and diamond breast-pin and a sum of money, on his passage on the steamboat Crystal Palace from Paducah to Louisville, brought this suit against the boat to recover compensation for his loss. He occupied on the trip state-room No. 10, and, before retiring to rest on the night of the larceny, he communicated to a servant on the boat the fact that the lock on his room door was out of order, and that the door could not be fastened ; he was told by the servant that there was no way to fasten…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Whicher v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Clark v. BurnsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875
- Adams v. New Jersey Steamboat Co.New York Court of Common Pleas · 1894
- Humphrey v. Merchants & Miners Transportation Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1928
- Pullman Palace Car Co. v. FreudensteinColorado Court of Appeals · 1893
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.