St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. Chas. H. Lilly Co.
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
On Rehearing
Finley, J.
The facts involved are adequately set forth in the opinion previously filed in this matter on June 30, 1955, which appears in 46 Wn. (2d) 840, 286 P. (2d) 107.
*529In a simple bailment which is for the mutual benefit of both bailor and bailee, where the parties do not contract explicitly or by inference respecting damages, loss, or destruction of the bailed property, the rule is that a bailee who is without fault is not liable for damages to the bailed property or for its loss or destruction. The risk or loss in such cases falls on the bailor. There is no split of authority…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Young v. . LearyNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Direct Navigation Co. v. DavidsonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1903
- Loeb v. FerberSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
- St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. Chas. H. Lilly Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1955
- Locomotive Exchange, Inc. v. Rucker Bros.Washington Supreme Court · 1919
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Chaloupka v. CyrWashington Supreme Court · 1963
- Brown v. WellsWashington Supreme Court · 1965
- Washington Hydroculture, Inc. v. PayneCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1980
- POC USA LLC v. Expeditors International of Washington IncDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2024
- Smugglers Cove LLC v. Aspen Power Catamarans LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.