Legal Opinion

Philadelphia Tapestry Mills v. New England Steamship Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided February 24, 1925PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRugg, C.J.

This is an action of contract to recover the value of merchandise transported by the defendant as common carrier. Undisputed facts are that the plaintiff sent the merchandise in question to the Mt. Hope Finishing Company at North Dighton in this Commonwealth, to be finished. That company, after doing its work, reshipped it from Fall *272River in this Commonwealth by the defendant under a bill of lading issued by the defendant at Fall River. That bill of lading contained on the line marked “Consigned to” the words, “ Wasserman Bros c/o S A Mangam Pier 14 NR.NY.” On the next line, marked…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Interstate Commerce CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  2. Interstate Commerce Commission v. Goodrich Transit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1912
  3. Great Northern Railway Co. v. O'ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  4. Commonwealth v. Peoples Express Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
  5. Burroughs v. Norwich & Worcester RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Southern Produce Co. v. Norfolk Southern RailroadSupreme Court of Virginia · 1926
  2. Utley v. Lehigh Valley R. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  3. Lyon v. Canadian Pacific Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
  4. Pontiac Refining Co. v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1935

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API