Seaboard Air-Line Railway Co. v. Montgomery
Cases that cite this one
11 later published cases cite this decision.
- Aero Mayflower Transit Co. v. Harbin (Ga. Ct. App. 1972)
- Bekins Van Lines Co. v. Barlow (Ga. Ct. App. 1971)
- Griffin Grocery Co. v. Pennsylvania Railroad (Ga. Ct. App. 1956)
- New York Central Railroad v. Frank H. Buck Co. (Cal. 1935)
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Brown (Ga. Ct. App. 1930)
- Moss Lumber Co. v. Michigan Cent. R. Co. (Ala. 1929)
- Southern Pacific Co. v. Oregon Growers Co-Operative Ass'n (Or. 1928)
- Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Johnson-Battle Lumber Co. (Ga. Ct. App. 1928)
- Southern Gravure Corp. v. Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad (Ga. Ct. App. 1928)
- Smith Bros. v. Charleston & Western Carolina Railway Co. (Ga. Ct. App. 1927)
- Western & Atlantic Railroad v. Legg (Ga. Ct. App. 1924)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
1. A common carrier may collect freight charges on goods either from the consignor or the consignee, unless it has entered into a special contract binding itself to collect the charges from one of them only. And a mere agreement between, the shipper and the carrier that the goods should be shipped “ charges collect,” arid a memorandum in the bill of lading to this effect, would not constitute such a special contract. Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Southern Railway Co., 147 Ga. 646 (95 S. E. 251).
2. Where a railroad company transports goods under a bill of lading which shows that the freight charges were to be collected from the consignee, and where the carrier, through its negligence, fails to collect, or even to attempt to collect, .the charges from the consignee (although it could have collected them if it had acted promptly) until after the consignee has become insolvent, the carrier can nevertheless recover the charges from the consignor. Southern Railway Co. v. Southern Cotton Oil Co., 19 Ga. App. 453 (91 S. E. 876).
(a) This ruling would not be affected by the fact that at the time of the
3. Under these rulings and the facts of the case, the railway company was entitled to a verdict in its favor for the full amount sued for, and the court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant.
Judgment reversed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.