Schaff v. Ike Exstein Bro.
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the CourtLevy, J.
(after stating the facts as above). The appellant pleaded, in bar of the suit, that the appellees had not made a timely claim in writing for failure to make delivery of the three cases of shoes, in accordance with the stipulation of the bill of lading.
The stipulation in the bill of lading, providing for the making of claim for loss or damage within a certain time, pursuant to federal act, became the lawful condition upon which the shoes were received and forwarded by the carriers, and was binding alike upon the carrier and the consignee or shipper. Ry. Co. v. Blish Milling Co., 241 U. S. 190,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Georgia, Florida & Alabama Railway Co. v. Blish Milling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Esteve Bros. & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1921
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. StarbirdSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Taft v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Texas & N. O. R. Co. v. McNattCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1949
- Hossley v. Roadway Express, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1967
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. VarnerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1927
- Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co. v. KileenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1943