Huston v. Peters, Hardin & Co.
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
CASE 40 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT. The facts appear in the opinion of the court. 1. The failure of the answer to controvert the value of the freight did not dispense with the necessity of proving it.
Read the full summary
CASE 40 — PETITION ORDINARY APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT. The facts appear in the opinion of the court. 1. The failure of the answer to controvert the value of the freight did not dispense with the necessity of proving it. ( Civil Code, sec. 153; 14 B. Mon., 393; 18 lb., 229.) 2. Where there is a well established uniform usage or custom for a carrier by water to land goods on a public wharf, or to leave them at a particular place of deposit for the consignee, without further notice to him, such usage or custom will govern. (Story on Bailments, sec. 543; 17 Wendell, 305; 16 Vermont…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE WOOD
DELIVERED THE OPINION OP THE COURT:
The appellants were owners, or part owners, of the steamboat Diamond, and common carriers betwixt the ports of Louisville, in Kentucky, and Nashville, Tennessee. This action was commenced in the circuit court by the appellees, to recover of defendants the value of certain roots and cuttings of grapes and other articles contained in three boxes, alleged to have been shipped by Watkins & Owsley, at Louisville, on board the steamer Diamond, on the 27th day of December, 1856, to be delivered to Seymore, Fanning & Co., in Nashville.
The bill of lading,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Gibson v. CulverNew York Supreme Court · 1837
- Cope v. CordovaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1829
3Cited by26 opinions
- Strang v. BradnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Kinney v. . KiernanNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Lothrop v. AdamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
- Kilgore v. BruceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Haskell v. StarbirdMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.