Court Opinion

ID: 9826122
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 15:23:08.54387+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:41:51.486304
License: Public Domain

The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Justice Watts.
This is an appeal from a directed verdict in favor of the respondent against the appellant, by his Honor, Judge Featherstone, at the November, 1923, term for Bamberg County.
Exception 1 is overruled, as his Honor, in the exercise of his discretion, had the right to make the ruliñg that he did, and for the reason that the appellant withdrew, his objection and proceeded with the case, and cannot now be allowed to question his Honor’s ruling.
Exceptions 2 and 3 are overruled.
The claim was filed within six months. The appellants admit that they knew the claim was filed with the Clyde Steamship Company. The suit was brought eight days after the two years expired.
No other inference can be drawn from the evidence than that the appellant (the initial carrier) was notified that the claim had' been filed in proper time with the Clyde Steamship Company.
The evidence shows that the terminal carrier made every effort to trace and locate the goods, and the initial carrier, the appellant, made no effort to assist the terminal carrier therein, did not even reply to their letters of inquiry.
The initial carrier is liable for loss no matter where the loss occurred. While suits must be brought within two years and one day, the bill of lading had this proviso:
*200/ “That in case the claim on which suit was based was made in writing within six months suit- shall be instituted not later than two years and one day after notice in writing is given by the carrier to the claimant that the carriel* has disallowed the claim or any part or parts thereof specified in the notice.” ■ . .
This appellant failed to do.
All exceptions are overruled and judgment affirmed.
Messrs. Justices Fraser and Marion concur.