Case Name: Margaret H. Remington, Respondent, v. William H. Barrett, as President of the Adams Express Company, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1923-01-30
Citations: 235 N.Y. 519
Docket Number: 
Parties: Margaret H. Remington, Respondent, v. William H. Barrett, as President of the Adams Express Company, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 235
Pages: 519–519

Head Matter:
Margaret H. Remington, Respondent, v. William H. Barrett, as President of the Adams Express Company, Appellant.
Carriers — express companies — action for loss of furs sent by express —• presumption that goods were in same state when received by connecting carrier as they were in when delivered to initial carrier.
Remington v. Barrett, 196 App-. Div. 838, affirmed.
(Submitted January 16, 1923;
decided January 30, 1923.)
Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered May 10, 1921, unanimously affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court. The plaintiff delivered to the American Express Company at Newton Center, Mass., on January 2, 1918, a pasteboard box, securely wrapped, containing a fur neckpiece and muff of the value of $125, to be shipped by express to Pemberton, N. J. The American Express Company did not have an office at Pemberton and the furs were delivered by it to the Adams Express Company, which company delivered the box January sixteenth. At the time it was delivered there was a hole in it and the furs were gone. This action was brought by the plaintiff against the Adams Express Company, the terminal carrier, to recover the value of the furs, alleging in the complaint that the furs were lost in transit through the negligence of the defendant, which contended that plaintiff had failed to show that the furs had come into its possession. The Appellate Division held that there is a presumption that the goods Were in the same state when received by the connecting carrier from the initial carrier that they were in when delivered to the initial carrier, and the burden is cast upon the connecting carrier to overcome that presumption.
Joseph C. Slaughter for appellant.
Edwin J. Mizen and Harry C. Mizen for respondent.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Bis cock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.