Muller v. Rogers
Muller v. Rogers
Opinion of the Court
The action is to recover - damages for injuries during the transit to two bales of furs, which plaintiff alleges that defendants agreed to carry from San Francisco to Hamburg.
The only serious question in the case is, whether the evidence is sufficient to show a contract, on their own account, by the defendants, to carry the goods. The plaintiff, himself, in his testimony, says: “Defendants are the agents of the West India and Pacific Steamship Company, Limited; I knew it, when I shipped these goods; I acted with them as sueh agents.” There is nothing in this evidence in any degree in conflict with this testimony of the plaintiff. There is other testimony tending strongly to show that defendants acted in the making of a contract to carry the goods, but it does not purport to state the character in which they acted, whether as principals, or agents. There is other testimony tending to show that they were commission merchants only, and had no interest, as owners, in any of the companies which actually took part in the carriage of the gocüs, and that they were, in fact, acting as agents of the West India and Pacific Steamship Company. But when the plaintiff on cross-examination comes to state the character in which defendants contracted, he says they were agents; that he knew it when he shipped
The judgment and order denying a new trial must be reversed on the ground indicated, and a new trial had; and it is so ordered, and remittitur directed to issue forthwith.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- ADOLPH MULLER v. ROBERT ROGERS
- Status
- Published