Pennsylvania R.R. Co. v. . Titus
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 11,1913, which reversed a determination of the Appellate Term affirming a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York in favor of plaintiff upon the submission of a controversy under section 211 of the Municipal Court Act as it formerly existed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 11,1913, which reversed a determination of the Appellate Term affirming a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York in favor of plaintiff upon the submission of a controversy under section 211 of the Municipal Court Act as it formerly existed. The nature of the controversy and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The defendant became liable for the tariff charges upon the shipment the moment he received the goods. (N. Y., N. H. &…
1Opinion of the CourtCollin, J.
The action is to recover from a consignee a balance of freight charges which had not been claimed or collected at the delivery of the goods. The cardinal facts are: In July, 1901, the plaintiff, a common carrier by railroad, engaged in interstate commerce, delivered to the defendant as the consignee 43,080 pounds of peaches. The legal freight charge, as fixed by the schedule of rates duly published, filed and posted, in accordance with the acts of Congress, and refrigerating charges were $491.45. On the day next following the delivery, the defendant paid the plaintiff the sum of $488.00,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MaxwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- New York, New Haven, & Hartford Railroad v. York & Whitney Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
- Krulder v. . EllisonNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Sweet v. . BarneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1861
- Hinsdell & Pitcher v. WeedNew York Supreme Court · 1848
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by59 opinions
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. FinkSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- New York Central Railroad v. Warren Ross Lumber Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1922
- Western & Atlantic R. v. UnderwoodDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1922
- Great Northern Ry. Co. v. HyderDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1922
- Papetti v. AlicandroMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.