Taylor v. Maine Central Railroad
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On report. The case is stated in the opinion. The whole conduct of the defendant in its various officers shows that it was then understood that the defendant was responsible for the safe arrival of the apples. The Neiv Hampshire court in the, case of Nashua Lock Go. v. Worcester & N. R. R. Go. 48 N. H. 339, has stated the law applicable to this case with clearness and great force.
Read the full summary
On report. The case is stated in the opinion. The whole conduct of the defendant in its various officers shows that it was then understood that the defendant was responsible for the safe arrival of the apples. The Neiv Hampshire court in the, case of Nashua Lock Go. v. Worcester & N. R. R. Go. 48 N. H. 339, has stated the law applicable to this case with clearness and great force. The court say : "In the agreed case it is said the goods were received to be forwarded to the place of their destination, and from that phrase an argument is drawn that the agreement of the defendant was to forward…
1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.
In December, 1892, the plaintiffs at Oakland shipped four carloads of apples on four different days, consigned to parties in Cincinnati, Ohio.
This action is brought to recover damages against the defendant as common carrier, occasioned by the apples freezing-while in the course of their transportation from Oakland to Cincinnati.
The plaintiffs base their claim upon the ground' that the defendant contracted to transport the apples from the place of shipment to Cincinnati. The defendant, however, claims that *301while the apples were to be carried to Cincinnati, the contract was to carry them only…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Myrick v. Michigan Central RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Burroughs v. Norwich & Worcester RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Washburn & Moen Manufacturing Co. v. Providence & Worcester RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1873
3Cited by1 opinion
- Taffe v. Oregon RailroadOregon Supreme Court · 1902