Case ID: ohio-law-abs_10/html/0327-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ROSS, PJ.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CINCINNATI MACHINERY & SUPPLY CO v ERIE R. R. CO.
    Ohio Appeals, 1st Dist, Hamilton Co
    No. 3829.
    Decided March 23, 1931
    
    W. B. Mente and, Benham & Benham, Cincinnati, for Cincinanti Machinery & Supply Co.
    Dinsmore, Shohl & Sawyer, Cincinnati, for Erie R. R. Co.
   ROSS, PJ.

It is claimed that the shipper is not re-* quired to produce evidence that the shipment was in good condition at the time it was delivered to $ie original carrier. Wo hold otherwise, and that the burden is upon the shipper to show the shipment was in good condition at the time it was delivered to and accepted by the original carrier.

There was no error, prejudicial to the plaintiff in error in the giving of this charge.

The defendant in error at the close of »the evidence of the plaintiff in the Municipal Court, there being no evidence of the condition of the goods at the time of delivery, moved for an instructed verdict, and again renewed this motion at the close of all the evidence. Both motions were overruled, and both should have been granted.

The verdict in favor of the carrier was entirely justified by the lack of any evidence indicating that the goods were, when shipped, in a condition different from that when received.

The judgment of the Court of Common Pleas, affirming the judgment of the Municipal Court of Cincinnati, is affirmed.

HAMILTON and CUSHING, JJ, concur.