Case Name: Uneeda Home Appliances, Inc., Respondent, v. Long Island Rail Road Company, Appellant, et al., Defendant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1966-03-09
Citations: 49 Misc. 2d 953
Docket Number: 
Parties: Uneeda Home Appliances, Inc., Respondent, v. Long Island Rail Road Company, Appellant, et al., Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 49
Pages: 953–953

Head Matter:
Uneeda Home Appliances, Inc., Respondent, v. Long Island Rail Road Company, Appellant, et al., Defendant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
March 9, 1966.
George M. Onken and Donald E. Lampson for appellant. Leon Brickman for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Plaintiff may not recover for damages to its goods in the absence of a showing that they were delivered to defendant carrier in a good condition (Orunstein v. New York Cent. R. R. Co., 179 App. Div. 465). This burden is not met by a recital in the bill of lading that the goods were received in apparent good order (Miller v. Hannibal & St. Joseph R. R. Co., 90 N. Y. 430; Jean, Garrison & Co. v. Flagg, 45 Misc. 421). In the interests of justice plaintiff should be afforded an opportunity to develop its proof on this aspect of the case.
The judgment should be unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with $30 costs to defendant to abide the event.
Brown, McDonald and Schwartzwald, JJ., concur.
Judgment reversed, etc.