Plough, Inc. v. The Mason and Dixon Lines
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
LIVELY, Circuit Judge.
This case deals with the burden of proof in an action by a shipper for injury to goods transported by a motor carrier. Following a non — jury trial, the district court found that the carrier had met its burden of proving that the goods of the shipper had an “inherent vice” and that the carrier was free of negligence, but that the shipper had failed to prove that the carrier had transported the goods in a soiled or defective trailer. We conclude that the district court misallocated the burden of proof and, accordingly, we vacate the judgment and remand for further…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Elmore & StahlSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Super Service Motor Freight Co., Inc. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1965
- United States v. Central of Georgia Railway Co.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1976
- American Hoist & Derrick Company v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Company, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969
- Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1954
3Cited by14 opinions
- Great West Casualty Co. v. FlandrichDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2009
- Custom Rubber Corp. v. ATS Specialized, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2009
- Jos. Schlitz Brewing Co., a Wisconsin Corporation v. Transcon Lines, a California CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- Mark VII Transportation Co. v. Responsive Trucking, Inc.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 2009
- Tokio Marine & Fire Insurance Group v. J.J. Phoenix Express, Ltd.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2001
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.