Case ID: nys_97/html/0993-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SCOTT, P. J. GIEGERICH, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WEIS v. ST. LOUIS & S. F. R. CO.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    March 2, 1906.)
    Carriers—Connecting Carriers—Special Contracts.
    The mere statement of the clerk of a railroad company receiving goods to the effect that they would be sent to the place of destination is no evidence of a special contract to transport the goods beyond the company’s own lines.
    [Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 9, Cent. Dig. Carriers, § 781.] Giegerich, J., dissenting.
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Fifth District. Action by Israel Weis against the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before. SCOTT, P. J., and GIEGERICH and GREEN-BAUM, JJ.
    Leon Dashew, for appellant.
    Roberts Walker,-for respondent.
   SCOTT, P. J.

There was not the slightest evidence of a through contract. The mere statement of the clerk who received them, to the effect that they would be sent to New York, is no evidence of a special contract.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

GREENBAUM, J., concurs.

GIEGERICH, J.

(dissenting). On the respondent’s .own theory of the law, the judgment should be reversed. The witness Zimlinslcy testified that the agent who received the goods said to the plaintiff that they would be sent to New York. This afforded evidence of a special contract on the defendant’s part to transport the goods beyond its own lines and to the place of destination.

The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.