Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Leach

249 U.S. 217, 39 S. Ct. 254, 63 L. Ed. 570, 1919 U.S. LEXIS 2195
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided March 10, 1919·No. 132·Published·Cited by 19 cases

Opinions

Mr, Justice McReynolds

delivered the opinion of the court.

Respondent Leach sued the petitioners for damages sustained en route by cattle delivered at East St. Loui; [218]*218Illinois, October 1, 1914, for shipment to Georgetown, Kentucky. In defense the carriers set up non-compliance with the following provision contained in bill of lading issued as required by act of Congress: “That no claim for damages which may accrue to the said shipper under this contract shall be allowed or paid by the said carrier, or sued for in any court by the said shipper, unless a claim for loss or damages shall be máde in writing verified by the affidavit of the shipper or his agent, and delivered to the General Freight Agent of said carrier at his office in Cincinnati, Ohio, within five days from the time said stock is removed from said car or cars, and that if any loss or damage occurs upon the line of connecting carrier, then such carrier shall not be liable unless a claim shall be made in like manner and delivered in like time, to some proper officer or agent of the carrier on whose line the loss or injury occurs.” This averment was not denied; but the shipper replied that he promptly advised the railroad’s agent at Georgetown of all essential facts and maintained that requirement in respect of written notice to general freight agent had been waived.

The point involved has been discussed in our recent opinions and we can find nothing which takes this case out of the rule requiring compliance with a provision in a bill of lading like the one above quoted. St. Louis, Iron Mt. & Southern Ry. Co. v. Starbird, 243 U. S. 592; Southern Pacific Co. v. Stewart, 248 U. S. 446.

The judgment below is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded.

Mr. Justice Pitney and Mr. Justice Brandéis concur in the result.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Leach, 249 U.S. 217, 39 S. Ct. 254, 63 L. Ed. 570, 1919 U.S. LEXIS 2195 (1919).

249 U.S. 217 (Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Leach) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Allianz-Ultramar CIA v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.
668 F. Supp. 518 (E.D. Virginia, 1987)
Johnson & Dealaman, Inc. v. Wm. F. Hegarty, Inc.
93 N.J. Super. 14 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1966)
Penn State Laundry Co. v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co.
134 F. Supp. 955 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1955)
Berg v. Schreiber
86 N.E.2d 125 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1949)
Lewis v. Roth
66 N.E.2d 510 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1946)
Manby v. Union Pac. R.
10 F.2d 327 (Eighth Circuit, 1926)
Jardine, Matheson & Co. v. United States
295 F. 696 (W.D. Washington, 1924)
Howell v. Hines
249 S.W. 924 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1923)
Union Pacific R. R. v. Pacific Market Co.
200 P. 108 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1921)
Carbic Manufacturing Co. v. Western Express Co.
184 N.W. 35 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1921)
Morrell v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.
179 N.W. 922 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1920)
Mason v. Maine Central Railroad
110 A. 425 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1920)
Erie Railroad v. Shuart
250 U.S. 465 (Supreme Court, 1919)
Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Leach
249 U.S. 217 (Supreme Court, 1919)