Legal Opinion
Mayer v. Southern Pacific Co.
City of New York Municipal Court
Decided May 15, 1916PublishedCited by 1 opinion
Action to recover the value of certain merchandise.
1Opinion of the CourtSpiegelberg, J.
The plaintiff seeks to recover the value of merchandise delivered by him to the defendant for shipment from New York city to Fort Worth, Tex. According to the bill of lading the goods were consigned to:
“ M. [M] C c/o Western National Bank Ft. Worth for A. J. Cohen 601 May St. Tex.”
The goods were delivered to Cohen at Fort Worth, Tex. The plaintiff now claims that this was a wrongful delivery, for which the defendant must be held responsible as the initial carrier under the amendment *500of 1906 to the Interstate Commerce Law, known as the Carmack amendment. 34 U. S. Stat. 584. This being an…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Adams Express Company v. CroningerSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- North Pennsylvania Railroad v. Commercial Bank of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Lawrence v. MinturnSupreme Court of the United States · 1855
- Bank of Batavia v. New York, Lake Erie & Western RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Pennsylvania R.R. Co. v. . TitusNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dusal Chemical Co. v. Southern Pacific Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1918