Detroit & Bay City Railway Co. v. McKenzie
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Lapeer. Assumpsit. Defendant brings error. as to the carrier’s freedom'from obligation to do more tbpn deliver goods at the destination marked on them, unless there are special directions, cited Wibert v. N. Y. é Erie B. B. 12 N. Y. 245; Nutting v. Conn. B. B. B. 1 Gray 502; Jenneson v. C. & A. B. B. 4 Am. L. Beg. 234.
1Opinion of the Court
Cooley, J".
In this action McKenzie recovered dam*610ages of the railroad company in respect to three several consignments of spars or masts, transported for him over its road. Different questions arise upon the record in respect to each of them, and they will therefore be considered separately. .
I. The first consignment was of 12 cars of masts or spars from Fish Lake station, for which receipts were given .of the following form:
“Detroit & Bay City Bailroad Company. Fish Lake Station, August 12, 1873. Eeceived from Jas. McKenzie in apparent good order two ears spars, 4612, 6206, marked Jas.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Moore v. Detroit Locomotive WorksMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
- Schneider v. EvansWisconsin Supreme Court · 1870
- Gass v. New York, Providence & Boston RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
3Cited by10 opinions
- Smith v. American Express Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Black v. WalterMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Berg v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fé RailroadSupreme Court of Kansas · 1883
- McEacheran v. Michigan Central RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
- Rickerson Roller Mill Co. v. Grand Rapids & Indiana RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.