Case ID: ny_59/html/0637-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Grover, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

James M. Ricketts et al., Appellants, v. The Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company, Respondent.
    (Argued November 18, 1874;
    decided December 1, 1874.)
    This was an action against defendant as a common carrier to recover the value of a case of merchandise which the complaint alleged defendant contracted to carry from the city of New York to Maysville, Kentucky, and which was lost in-transit.
    Defendant was a common carrier and operated a railroad from Baltimore to Parkersburgh, West Virginia. It had an office in the city of New York, its agent there having authority to make freight contracts. ■ One of the plaintiffs called upon such agent and stated that he was desirous of sending some merchandise to Maysville, and inquired at what rate defendant would carry the same. The agent replied, at the rate of one dollar and fifty-one cents per hundred, and told him to have the same marked “ B. and O. Express, River ” and to deliver at the freight depot of the Camden and Amboy Railroad Company. Eighteen days afterward plaintiffs caused the merchandise in question to be delivered at said depot, marked as directed. A bill of lading was delivered to the carman who brought the goods, which contained a provision, in substance, that no connecting carrier should be held liable for any loss or damage to goods except what occurred on its own route. The merchandise was carried to Baltimore, delivered to defendant and carried over its road, and at Parkersburgh delivered on board a steamboat on the Ohio river, bound to Maysville. It was not delivered at Maysville. The referee found there was no through contract established, and that defendant was not liable. Held, no error.
    
    
      Charles F. Sanford for the appellants.
    
      Waldo Hutchins for the respondent.
   Grover, J.,

reads for affirmance.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.