Legal Opinion
Hubbard v. Olsen-Roe Transfer Co.
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided March 25, 1924PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
The complaint in this case is based upon defendant’s liability as a warehouseman, for hire, of plaintiffs’ household goods.
The “Uniform Warehouse Receipts Act” provides, among other things:
“A warehouseman shall be liable for any loss or injury to the goods caused by his failure to exercise such care in regard to them as a reasonably careful owner of similar goods would exercise, but he shall not be liable, in the absence of an agree-' ment to the contrary, for any loss or injury to the goods which could not have been avoided by the exercise of such care.” Or. L., § 8028.
Again:
“A warehouseman…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. HallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Smith v. Oregon Short Line Ry. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1893
- Staten Island Midland Railroad v. HinchliffeNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- Harrison v. BirrellOregon Supreme Court · 1911
- Pitkin v. New York & New England RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1894
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Lasley v. Combined Transport, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2011
- Harris v. Northwest Natural Gas Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1978
- Klerk v. Tektronix, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1966
- Deering v. AlexanderOregon Supreme Court · 1978
- State Ex Rel. Moltzner v. MottOregon Supreme Court · 1939
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.