Phenix Nerve Beverage Co. v. Dennis & Lovejoy Wharf & Warehouse Co.
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract to recover damages for the freezing of certain goods of the plaintiff stored with the defendant. Writ dated June 16, 1904. At the trial in the Superior Court before Bell, J. it appeared that the defendant carries on a general warehouse business in the city of Boston; that in February, 1908, the plaintiff stored with the defendant some thousands of cases of Phenix Nerve Beverage and ginger ale; that portions of these goods were removed and additions were made to them…
Read the full summary
Contract to recover damages for the freezing of certain goods of the plaintiff stored with the defendant. Writ dated June 16, 1904. At the trial in the Superior Court before Bell, J. it appeared that the defendant carries on a general warehouse business in the city of Boston; that in February, 1908, the plaintiff stored with the defendant some thousands of cases of Phenix Nerve Beverage and ginger ale; that portions of these goods were removed and additions were made to them from time to time; that in March, 1904, the goods in about three hundred and fifty eases were found to be frozen. The…
1Opinion of the CourtLathrop, J.
The defendant in this case did not admit that the oral contract was as testified to by the agent of the plaintiff. The case was therefore properly submitted to the jury. Thruston v. Thornton, 1 Cush. 89. Camerlin v. Palmer Co. 10 Allen, 539. Winchester v. Howard, 97 Mass. 303. Gassett v. Glazier, 165 Mass. 473.
The charge of the judge was sufficiently favorable to the defendant in instructing the jury that they were entitled to consider not only what was said or written, but what was done by the parties in pursuance of the talk and letters, and to determine whether the agents of the plaintiff…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Winchester v. HowardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Stollenwerck v. ThacherMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- Gassett v. GlazierMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1896
- Proctor v. Old Colony RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
- Rowe v. CarreyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Noble v. Mead-Morrison Manufacturing Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
- Goldstein v. KatzMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
- Rolfe v. TuftsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Deane v. American Glue Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Taylor v. AndersonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.