Seals v. Edmondson
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Barbour Circuit Court. Tried before lion. H. D. ClaytoN. This was a suit by David M. Seals against R. Q. Edmondson, to recover damages for the loss of twelve bales of cotton, which the plaintiff had stored with the defendant as a warehouseman, at a stipulated rate of storage, and which were destroyed by fire, on the night, of 25th December, 1880, by reason of the alleged negligence and want of proper care and diligence on the part of the defendant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Barbour Circuit Court. Tried before lion. H. D. ClaytoN. This was a suit by David M. Seals against R. Q. Edmondson, to recover damages for the loss of twelve bales of cotton, which the plaintiff had stored with the defendant as a warehouseman, at a stipulated rate of storage, and which were destroyed by fire, on the night, of 25th December, 1880, by reason of the alleged negligence and want of proper care and diligence on the part of the defendant. The defendant pleaded (1) the general issue; (2) “ that by the contract under which the plaintiff stored the cotton, mentioned in the…
1Opinion of the CourtBrickell, C. J.
-Warehousemen are of the class of bail-ees known as paid agents, exercising private employments, whose liability and relation is essentially different from that of common carriers. Their duty is to bring to the business in which they are employed reasonable skill and diligence, and they are answerable only for ordinary negligence.—Moore v. Mayor, 1 Stew. 284; Hatchett v. Gibson, 13 Ala. 587; S. C., 24 Ala. 201; Jones v. Hatchett, 14 Ala. 743. As they do not exercise a public employment; as they are at liberty to select their own customers, to accept only such business or service as they may…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Claflin v. . MeyerNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Lamb v. Camden & Amboy Railroad & Transportation Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1871
- City Council of Montgomery v. Gilmer & TaylorSupreme Court of Alabama · 1858
- Schmidt v. BloodNew York Supreme Court · 1832
- Magee v. BillingsleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1842
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Davis & Son v. HurtSupreme Court of Alabama · 1896
- Karr v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
- Higman v. CamodySupreme Court of Alabama · 1895
- Prince v. Alabama State FairSupreme Court of Alabama · 1894
- Lewis v. EbersoleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1943
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.