Scott v. American Railway Express Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.
The facts are to be found in the judgment of the Superior Court, which will be reported herewith.
Tbe ease presents but a single question for decision. It is tbis: Are the words, “damaged in transit by carelessness or negligence,” as used in the “Cummins Amendment” of 4 March, 1915, and in the contract of shipment, approved by the Interstate Commerce Commission and known as the uniform express receipt, broad enough to include, and were they intended to include, a total loss in transit occasioned by the carrier’s carelessness or negligence? Or, stated differently, does a negligent loss in…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Adams Express Company v. CroningerSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Georgia, Florida & Alabama Railway Co. v. Blish Milling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Hailey v. Oregon Short Line R.District Court, D. Idaho · 1918
- Gillette Safety Razor Co. v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1922
- Kahn v. American Railway Express Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1921
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Neece v. Richmond Greyhound Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1957