Meigs v. Hagan
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
This was a libel in personam by H. Y. L. Meigs & Co. against Peter Hagan and others, owners of the barge Morrisdale, to recover damages for breach of a contract of carriage. Supplemental Brief on Behalf of ^Respondents. The assumption by libelants that they were the shippers of the coal and that the bill of lading is the contract between the parties is without foundation.
Read the full summary
This was a libel in personam by H. Y. L. Meigs & Co. against Peter Hagan and others, owners of the barge Morrisdale, to recover damages for breach of a contract of carriage. Supplemental Brief on Behalf of ^Respondents. The assumption by libelants that they were the shippers of the coal and that the bill of lading is the contract between the parties is without foundation. The uncontradicted testimony is that the boat was chartered to the consignees for the purpose of carrying the coal which had been sold to them by libelants f. o. b. The bill of lading shows that Hie actual shipper was the…
1Opinion of the Court
BUTLER, District Judge.
Blum v. The Caddo, 1 Woods, 64 [Fed. Cas. No. 1,573], is directly in point, as respects the libelant’s right to sue, and is well supported by the cases cited in the opinion. It is a decision on appeal, in admiralty, and I therefore feel bound to follow it. The facts before me present the question in an unusually strong light for the respondent. The property was delivered to a carrier employed by the purchaser to receive it on his account. The carrier was therefore his agent, not by implication of law simply, but by express authorization. He was sent for the property by,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Blum v. The CaddoU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · 1870
3Cited by2 opinions
- Parker Buggy Corp. v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
- Buggy Corporation v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1910