McEachran v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Lillibridge, J. Trover by William A. McEachran and another against the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiffs bring error. Plaintiffs had purchased in Canada seven car loads of wood, which were shipped to them at Detroit, over the defendant’s road. January 28th Mr. McEachran learned that the cars had arrived, and were standing in defendant’s yard.
Read the full summary
Error to Wayne; Lillibridge, J. Trover by William A. McEachran and another against the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada. From a judgment for defendant on verdict directed by the court, plaintiffs bring error. Plaintiffs had purchased in Canada seven car loads of wood, which were shipped to them at Detroit, over the defendant’s road. January 28th Mr. McEachran learned that the cars had arrived, and were standing in defendant’s yard. He went immediately to one of the offices of the defendant, but not to the regular freight office where he always paid his freight. He testified that he there…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
(after stating the facts). At the conclusion of the evidence, plaintiffs’ counsel conceded the reasonableness of- the car-service rule, but claimed that payment of freight before delivery of the cars had been waived. The question of waiver is therefore the only one before us. Plaintiffs claim that this should have been submitted to the jury. The court held that there was no evidence to show authority in the employé, with whom Mr. McEachran talked, to waive payment.
*320The right of a common carrier to the prepayment of freight charges before delivery is important. When a party relies upon the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Wabash Railway Co. v. BloomgardenMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
- Pacific & Atlantic Shippers, Inc. v. American News Co.Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1967