Geismer v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made at the October term, 1884, which overruled defendant’s exceptions and directed judgment for plaintiff on a verdict. (Reported below, 84 Hun, 50.) This action was brought to recover damages for alleged negligence on the part of defendant in the performance of a contract for transportation of live stock.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made at the October term, 1884, which overruled defendant’s exceptions and directed judgment for plaintiff on a verdict. (Reported below, 84 Hun, 50.) This action was brought to recover damages for alleged negligence on the part of defendant in the performance of a contract for transportation of live stock. Hpon the trial of this action there was evidence proving or tending to prove these facts: On the 21st day of July, 1877, the plaintiff delivered to the defendant, at…
1Opinion of the Court
Earl,. J.
We are of opinion that the learned trial judge fell into terror as to rules of law of vital and controlling importance in the disposition of this case.
A railroad carrier stands upon the same footing as other carriers, and may excuse delay in the delivery of goods by accident or misfortune not inevitable or produced by the act of God. All that can be required of it in any emergency is that it shall exercise due care and diligence to guard against delay and to forward the goods to their destination; and so it has been uniformly decided. (Wibert v. N. Y. & Erie Railroad Co., 12 N. Y.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Weed v. . the Panama Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Blackstock v. . the New York and Erie Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Wibert v. . the New-York and Erie Railroad Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1855
- Pittsburgh, Cincinnati & St. Louis R. W. Co. v. HollowellIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
- Pittsburgh, Ft. Wayne & Chicago R. R. v. HazenIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Crossman v. BurrillSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Empire Transp. Co. v. Philadelphia & R. Coal & Iron Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1896
- Simons v. WittmannMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905
- Mendoza v. Gallup Southwestern Coal Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1937
- American Fruit Distributors v. HinesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.