Morse v. Connecticut River Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Action of tort by a passenger from Springfield to Chicopee on the defendants’ railroad, for the loss of her trunk. At the trial in the court of common pleas, the plaintiff introduced the deposition of a man who accompanied her on that occasion, from which Mellen, C. J., at the defendants’ suggestion, ordered the following statement to be stricken out: “ The next morning after the trunk was lost, in accounting for the trank, on my inquiry, either the conductor or baggage…
Read the full summary
Action of tort by a passenger from Springfield to Chicopee on the defendants’ railroad, for the loss of her trunk. At the trial in the court of common pleas, the plaintiff introduced the deposition of a man who accompanied her on that occasion, from which Mellen, C. J., at the defendants’ suggestion, ordered the following statement to be stricken out: “ The next morning after the trunk was lost, in accounting for the trank, on my inquiry, either the conductor or baggage master told me that, the night before, a gentleman stepped up and claimed and took a trank of the same description. But the…
1Opinion of the Court
Bigelow, J.*
The declarations offered in evidence were made *451by the conductor or the baggage master, and by the station master, “ the next morning after the trunk was lost, in accounting for the trunk,” in answer to inquiries in behalf of the plaintiff". It was part of the duty of those agents to deliver the baggage of passengers, and to account for the same, if missing, provided inquiries for it were made within a reasonable time. These declarations were therefore made by them as agents of the defendants, within the scope of their agency, and while it continued. They should therefore have been…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Lynchburg Telephone Co. v. BookerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1905
- Blair v. Security BankSupreme Court of Virginia · 1905