Bradford v. Rapid Transfer & Storage Co.

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this case and submit the following as my reasons therefor, to-wit:

As I view the case there is but one question involved, and that is whether the facts disclose lack of ordinary or reasonable care on the part of defendant, with respect to providing security for the safety of the whiskey.

The jurisprudence of this State and the statutes require of the warehouseman only ordinary and reasonable care in order to fulfill his obligation to those who deposit goods with him. Section 21 of Act 221 of 1908. See also: Austin v. Heath, 168 La. 605, 122…