The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1910-11-30
EMPRESS COMPANY LIABLE.
Must Pa, Fuil Value for Ba&sase Lost
When No enquiry OF yalne Was Made.


! ENPHESS SOWP1N1 Liable.
~, ,,, ,,, O.. u
/ nus ~" ~
VINE" ~" sh"iu"s " '~"V ".s "suN.
| The Appellate Division OF the supreme
Court. firs' Department. has decided that
| II the representative Of an express company
takes an article OF baggage for transpOrtA
I lion and the baggage is lost the carrier
must paw the full value Of the article unless
the carrier inquiries a. 10 its value hen II
was accepted for transportation. Under
the statute the carrier il permitted to make
an additional charge for assuming liability
over si5O. but IN the case at bar the carrier
! confended thai It's liability should he limited
Ia only SIZE, although there was no inquiry
a. 10 the yalu.
The case WAS Neister W. the New York
Transfer Company. the plaintiff being
a--ignor 81 "a person who was passenger
on III. Pennsylvania Railroad and arrived
in tbs. citr on ,Iu,n- ~ 1875 On July she
i.iiy,red her b.pgag. check 10 a rcpre-
s.ntati,. OF this. ,.f.ndan, and the trunk
u,s ,,.,., daLvsr.d The pIain,,6 "a.
,,x,rsd .td,un..p, far s.s, i, the Nunic,rai
-. =, a.. Il, -, ~, ,.,,rL - n
-, ..,,, -
W ''h
tna' w" "IhA '"'''" Wa """Iff"" at "@-
'"hdhh' ONO" ana 'he heI"huah' repre-
sentative" Was informed mat me trunk had
arrived from North carolina and was to ina
mad. no inquiry a. to the value oT the trunk
and m. ,,,nar vnIunteered none aocord
my tn Instructions tho agent made the cus-
,,,,,g,,- cb.-,,. for ,,aI,veripy she ,,u,L
nr.,-t,,,rs, I,,-,ir. I,,,,rahar ,,wt,in~ 49,.
,,,'. -
~ ,, 80
49,. l,,, ,',t,h ,,-,,,ds- r., -,
,n,u,nou ,,,r-r,.r including an sxnrsx. corn,
many hail - N. bl. for ALI Ioaa d,m...n,
,n,,,,,. IA IN. nro,.r,v Carried a. h.1g.v.
nm IN the r,iIl vain. and regardless. 81 IN.
,b,r,,re, ,he,ao, hu, IN. yalus an s,rsm.
Of si-n sbnll he stated upon dctvery 10 IN.
CARVER and a vr,t,en rec.int s-stipv the
value sb.II h. issu.d ny tho csrri.r who
NAV max. A reasonable charge for tho az.
.u,,nt,,n of liability in e,c.-. "a q, IN and
for tn. carriage NJ bavpa9. eycsadinv Izo
no,,nds in weight ,,,,op !, .ipuIe ,Icks,"
Jh.,.,f,r sav.,
IN. nrst question pr..en,.i Is whr,nrr NJ mn,
This trunk was pr,p.rly carried a. h.vV.u. ~
~ va, then by the express provisions Of TN,
statute the defendant was nSbe for the fun valu.
-, the trunk Unless relieved from liability by
Subsequent provisions ~ the section The apph
cnNon ~ hie '"0'i"n was in'ended to be limited
70 me nasghs~ OF passengers hS disunct from
general "'fchHhI'>e nrh'sIeh y" common
carrier r"f Uhh>porhu"h ~ was the nature ~
ne article nat Vas Z" determine the liability Of
The carrier : trunk shipped hy an express rOrn-
pdnS A. mrTrhahdlsc ana NOT As me personal
baggage "I uaNei"r "oNia nof he within ms
section hl' ~ seems IN ne masking the section
apphcabic 10 ah express company when does not
carry passengers eNlh"e' clear intention thas
The carrying w passenger al me same tins
ihH' 'hr baggage was transported was NOV neceS-
SaTy Il" impo>" upon the express company tho
haolNN lu'posei ny IN" section
The, court saws II was necessary that thu
ariIcl. carried should n. the personal bag.
ga "a. of "A traveller and TN. Article IN c,,m.
hin the section must IN. such personal