Vervaeke v. Adams Express Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania March 20, 1911

Vervaeke v. Adams Express Co., 230 Pa. 647 (Pa. 1911)

79 A. 764; 1911 Pa. LEXIS 663

Abt, Elkin, Fell, Mestbezat, Potteb, Stew

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

Leave to amend the statement of claim was properly *651allowed for the reasons stated in the opinion of the learned judge of the common pleas, making absolute the plaintiff’s rule for that purpose. The question whether the rule of law in this state, which prohibits a common carrier from limiting its liability for negligence, is abrogated by the Interstate Commerce Act, was decided at the trial in accordance with Wright v. Adams Express Co., 43 Pa. Superior Ct. 40, the judgment in which case we have affirmed in an opinion handed down with this, ante, p. 635.

The judgment is affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: Vervaeke v. Adams Express Company
Cited By: 3 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: Common carriers — Amendment—Cause of action — Statement of claim ■ — Negligence. 1. Where in an action of trespass against a common carrier, the statement of claim charges negligence on the part of the defendant, and claims damages on account of such negligence upon the general, implied or common-law liability of the defendant as a common carrier, the court may, after a verdict for the defendant and upon the granting of a new trial, permit the plaintiff to amend his statement of claim so as to charge the negligence more in detail and recite and refer to a special contract under the terms of which the shipment was made, and conclude with a claim for damages on account of the alleged negligence. Carriers — Common carrier — -Limitation of liability — Interstate commerce. 2. The Act of Congress of June 29, 1906, 34 Statutes at Large, 584, does not prevent the Pennsylvania courts from continuing to apply the rule that a common carrier cannot contract for exemption from his own negligence, or that of his servants, nor for a limited liability in case of loss from such negligence.