Loveland v. Burke
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract against a common carrier between Boston and Somerville, to recover the value of a hogshead of molasses. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Rockwell, J., it appeared that the plaintiffs employed the defendant to transport a hogshead of molasses from Boston to their grocery store in Soinerville; that' the defendant did transport it in his wagon to Somerville at a point near their store; that the plaintiffs then directed him to unload it to and upon the piazza…
Read the full summary
Contract against a common carrier between Boston and Somerville, to recover the value of a hogshead of molasses. At the trial in the Superior Court, before Rockwell, J., it appeared that the plaintiffs employed the defendant to transport a hogshead of molasses from Boston to their grocery store in Soinerville; that' the defendant did transport it in his wagon to Somerville at a point near their store; that the plaintiffs then directed him to unload it to and upon the piazza of the store; that he backed his wagon to within a few feet of the piazza, and skids or wooden supports were then placed…
1Opinion of the CourtAmes, J.
The usage which the defendant attempted to prove was not unreasonable in itself, nor was it in contravention of any rule of law. It was not an attempt to establish, for the purposes of this case, any special or peculiar rule of interpretation of terms, conflicting with their recognized and ordinary legal meaning. It was offered merely to prove, as a matter of fact, that there was an established mode of doing a certain business in the locality where the parties reside, so web known to them as to *142justify the conclusion, that they both expected and understood that the business, which the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Gibson v. CulverNew York Supreme Court · 1837
- Farmers' & Mechanics' Bank v. Champlain Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1851
- Farmers' & Mechanics' Bank v. Champlain Transportation Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1846
3Cited by7 opinions
- Florence Machine Co. v. DaggettMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. HallIndiana Court of Appeals · 1910
- Sugarland Industries v. Universal MillsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925
- Virginia & S. W. R. Co. v. SutherlandTennessee Supreme Court · 1917
- Creel v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.