Mobile & Ohio R. R. v. Tupelo Furniture Mfg. Co.

Mississippi Supreme Court
Mobile & Ohio R. R. v. Tupelo Furniture Mfg. Co., 67 Miss. 35 (Miss. 1889)
Campbell

Mobile & Ohio R. R. v. Tupelo Furniture Mfg. Co.

Opinion of the Court

Campbell, J.,

The first and second instructions given for the. plaintiff are *38objectionable, but immaterial because not influential in determining the case, which is properly resolvable in view óf the facts by a resolution of the question; whether it devolved on the plaintiff to show that the damage to the property was done on the road of the defendant or on the defendant to show that it occurred before it received the goods for transportation. That is the only material question in the case.

We think the better reason and policy and the greater number of cases adjudged favor the rule to require the carrier which delivers goods damaged, and which ai’e shown to have started on their journey over connecting lines of transportation in good condition, to. exculpate itself from liability by showing that the injury did not occur by its default.

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Mobile & Ohio R. R. Co. v. Tupelo Furniture Mfg. Co.
Cited By
10 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Carriers. Connecting lines. Damages. Presumption. Where goods shipped over connecting lines are delivered to the consignee in a damaged condition, and it is proven that they started on their journey in good condition, the carrier thus delivering them to the consignee will he liable for the damage, unless it shows that the injury did not occur through its fault.