Alabama Great Southern Ry. Co. v. Commonwealth Cotton Manufacturing Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Birmingham City Court. Heard before Hox. C. W. Ferguson. The following Avere the agreed facts: “On tlie 30th day of October, 1902, the Commonwealth Cotton Manufacturing Company purchased from Smith & Coughlin, cotton brokers, doing business in Birmingham, Alabama, fifty (50) hales of cotton at 8 9-16 cents per pound, sight draft, terms, hill of lading attached, landed at Durham, North Carolina.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Birmingham City Court. Heard before Hox. C. W. Ferguson. The following Avere the agreed facts: “On tlie 30th day of October, 1902, the Commonwealth Cotton Manufacturing Company purchased from Smith & Coughlin, cotton brokers, doing business in Birmingham, Alabama, fifty (50) hales of cotton at 8 9-16 cents per pound, sight draft, terms, hill of lading attached, landed at Durham, North Carolina. “On the 9th day of April, 1903, the agent of the Alabama Great Southern Railroad Company, who had authority to issue hills of lading, issued a hill of lading at Birmingham, Alabama, for…
1Opinion of the CourtSimpson, J.
This is an action by the consignee of 50 hales of cotton, which were, shipped by a broker in Birmingham, Ala., from -whom the plaintiff (appellee) had bought the cotton, to the appellee in North Carolina; the bill of lading having been sent to appellee, with draft attached, which was paid. It is acknowledged that the cotton actually received by the carrier was delivered; the damages being claimed because the bill of lading stated the weight of the cotton to be 25,637 pounds, when, in fact, it weighed only 11,305 pounds. It is agreed that the railroad company's agent did not weigh the cotton…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Pollard v. VintonSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Friedlander v. Texas & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. KnightSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Miller v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Jasper Trust Co. v. K. C., M. & B. R. R.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1892
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- National Park Bank v. L. & N. R. R.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1917
- Davis v. ZimmernSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
- Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway v. FlournoySupreme Court of Georgia · 1913