Frischhertz Electric Co. v. Strickland Transportation Co.
Supreme Court of Louisiana
1DissentHamlin, Justice
I am compelled to respectfully dissent from the majority opinion. Under the facts and circumstances of the instant case, I do not believe that the delivering carrier, Strickland Transportation Company, Inc., is liable to the consignee, Frischhertz Electric Company, Inc., for shipment damage.
The facts of record disclose that the instant cadmium batteries were ordered by plaintiff and shipped from Lightalarms Electronics Corporation located in Brooklyn, New York. They were delivered to plaintiff’s job site in Arabi, Louisiana on October 2, 1968, and at the time of delivery, Frischhertz’s…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Adams Express Company v. CroningerSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Elmore & StahlSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Riverside MillsSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Co. v. WallaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Railway Co. v. RankinSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.