Cutting v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Replevin of five hundred barrels of flour. The writ was dated May 3,1865. The answer alleged that the defendants, as common carriers, had a lien upon the flour for charges of transportation, and were entitled to the possession thereof until said charges were paid.
Read the full summary
Replevin of five hundred barrels of flour. The writ was dated May 3,1865. The answer alleged that the defendants, as common carriers, had a lien upon the flour for charges of transportation, and were entitled to the possession thereof until said charges were paid. At the trial in the superior court, before Vose, J., the plaintiffs introduced evidence tending to show the following facts: The flour was forwarded to the plaintiffs by their agent from Milwaukee, over the Detroit and Milwaukee Railroad, which connects with the defendants’ railroad at Detroit Junction, and the defendants’ railroad,…
1Opinion of the CourtGray, J.
The only question which has been argued upon these exceptions is of the measure of the plaintiffs’ damages for non-delivery of their goods. After full consideration of the able and elaborate arguments of counsel, the court is unanimously of opinion that the instruction requested by the plaintiffs at the trial should have been given, and that the instruction under which a verdict was returned for the defendants was erroneous.
It is the duty of a common carrier, receiving goods for transportation, to deliver them at the place of destination at the time agreed upon, or, in the absence of any…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hamilton v. . McPhersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Sisson v. Cleveland & Toledo RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1866
- Wibert v. New York & Erie Rail RoadNew York Supreme Court · 1854
- King v. WoodbridgeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1861
- Kent v. Hudson River Rail RoadNew York Supreme Court · 1856
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.