Legal Opinion

Secoulsky v. Oceanic Steam Navigation Co.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided April 5, 1916PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBraley, J.

The jury having found that through the defendant’s negligence the plaintiff’s baggage was lost, the only question is whether the ruling as to the measure of damages was correct.

The prepaid certificate for a third class passage, purchased of the defendant in this Commonwealth by the plaintiff’s son, was transmitted to his father; but whether in making the purchase the son acted as the plaintiff’s agent, or whether the certificate *466was a gift, does not appear. The plaintiff, having exchanged the certificate for a third class ticket at Liverpool, sailed on the steamship; but his baggage was not…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Fonseca v. Cunard Steamship Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
  2. Callender, McAuslan & Troup Co. v. FlintMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904
  3. P. Garvan, Inc. v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  4. McKinney v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  5. O'Regan v. Cunard Steamship Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1894

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Murrary v. . Cunard Steamship Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1923
  2. Cass v. LordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
  3. Costello v. HayesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
  4. Cray v. Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  5. Reichman v. Compagnie Generale TransatlantiqueNew York Court of Appeals · 1943

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

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

Powered by the Exa API