Kemp v. Coughtry
New York Supreme Court
TWO of the defendants, Sherman and Yale, were owners of a sloop, called the Washington, employed in carrying and transporting goods, &c. between the cities of Nem-York and Albany; and in the spring of the year 1813, they agreed to sell the one . . , trnrd part of the vessel to Coughtry, the other defendant, who was the master, and for a price stipulated; the conveyance of the one third to be executed on the payment of the money.
Read the full summary
TWO of the defendants, Sherman and Yale, were owners of a sloop, called the Washington, employed in carrying and transporting goods, &c. between the cities of Nem-York and Albany; and in the spring of the year 1813, they agreed to sell the one . . , trnrd part of the vessel to Coughtry, the other defendant, who was the master, and for a price stipulated; the conveyance of the one third to be executed on the payment of the money. In the mean time, Coughtry was to take charge of the vessel, as master, and use and employ her for the benefit of the other defendants, who were to pay him wages for…
1Per curiam
Since the decision of this court in the cases of Colt v. M‘Mechen, (6 Johns. Rep. 160.) and Elliot and Stewart v. Rossell and Lewis, (10 Johns. Rep. 1.) it is no longer to be questioned, that the owners of vessels employed in the transpor*109iation of property, are to be considered common carriers, and liable to all the duties and responsibilities attached to that character. They are responsible for the safe delivery of all goods intrusted to them, or their agents, or servants, unless the loss is | occasioned by the act of God, or a public enemy. The general principles being well settled, the…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Zug v. LaughlinIndiana Supreme Court · 1864
- Fleming v. DonahoeOhio Supreme Court · 1831
- Harrington v. M'ShaneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
- The New HampshireDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1880
- The IllinoisDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 1879
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.