Mills v. Southern Ry.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Wilson, J., Chester, November, 1907. Action by Patience A. Mills against Southern Railway Company. Prom judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
Read the full summary
Before Wilson, J., Chester, November, 1907. Action by Patience A. Mills against Southern Railway Company. Prom judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Mr. McDonald cites : Notice must be given at time of shipment: 77 S. C., 182; 71 S. C., 85, 211; 73 S. C., 264; 74 S'. C., 286; 75 S. C., 354; 76 S. C., 342; 77 S. C., 185; 79 S. C., 155. cites: Notice before shipment to any agent of the carrier is sufficient: 1 Hutch, on Car., 118; 76 S. C., 176; 77 S. C., 216, 78; 76 S. C., 338; 71 S. C., 86; 70 S. C., 6. Not necessary for owner of bill of lading to prove injury from delay: 77 S. C., 62.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Woods.
The complaint in this action alleges a delay of thirteen days in the transportation of a carload of lumber from Westville, in Kershaw county, a station on defendant’s railroad, to Smiths, in York county, another station on defendant’s railroad, not over one hundred miles distant. Judgment was demanded on account of this delay for sixty-five dollars, as the amount of the statutory penalty at five dollars a day for thirteen days, and for two hundred dollars special damages.
At the trial plaintiff’s counsel conceded that there was no…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Greenville Baseball, Inc. v. Bearden, SheriffSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1942
- Cato v. Grendel Cotton MillsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1925
- State v. Firemen's Insurance Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1931
- Cato v. Grendel Cotton MillsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1925
- City of Darlington v. KilgoSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1990
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.