Legal Opinion
Transmarine Corporation v. Charles H. Levitt & Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided March 12, 1928No. 193PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtL. Hand, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). We agree that the bill of lading was the only contract between the parties, and that it took the place of the prior oral contract as the final memorial of the parties’ obligations. The Delaware, 14 Wall. 579, 20 L. Ed. 779; The Caledonia, 157 U. S. 124, 139, 15 S. Ct. 537, 39 L. Ed. 644; Guillaume v. General Transp. Co., 100 N. Y. 491, 498, 3 N. E. 489 (semble). When the goods have once been dispatched under an oral contract and are beyond recall, the issuance and acceptance of a bill of lading has been treated not to substitute it as the contract. Burns v.…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Miller v. RobertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- The CaledoniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Pennsylvania Steel Co. v. New York City Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1912
- Union Pacific Railroad v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- The DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Petition of Isbrandtsen Company, Inc. Isbrandtsen Co., Inc. v. United States. The Edmund FanningCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1953
- American Tobacco Co. v. the Katingo HadjipateraDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1948
- Armco International Corporation v. Rederi A/B DisaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
- Aunt Jemima Mills Co. v. Lloyd Royal BelgeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- Olivier Straw Goods Corporation v. Osaka Shosen KaishaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.