J. T. Lunn Co. v. Cameron

Fifth Circuit

J. T. Lunn Co. v. Cameron

55 F. 525, 5 C.C.A. 207

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 16, 1893

DocketNo. 42

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 55 F. 525 (J. T. Lunn Co. v. Cameron) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

J. T. Lunn Co. v. Cameron, 55 F. 525, 5 C.C.A. 207 (5th Cir. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

McOORMIOK, Circuit Judge.

The appellants claim that the damage to the cargo was occasioned either by inherent defects in the goods or by sweat of the ship, and within the exceptions in the [526]*526bill of lading. The burden of proof was on them to show this, as the fact of damage and its extent were fully shown. A careful examination and consideration of the proof fails to satisfy us that such was the case, and our conclusion, therefore, is that the judgment of the district court should be affirmed at appellants’ cost, and it is so ordered.

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

McOORMIOK, Circuit Judge.

The appellants claim that the damage to the cargo was occasioned either by inherent defects in the goods or by sweat of the ship, and within the exceptions in the [526]*526bill of lading. The burden of proof was on them to show this, as the fact of damage and its extent were fully shown. A careful examination and consideration of the proof fails to satisfy us that such was the case, and our conclusion, therefore, is that the judgment of the district court should be affirmed at appellants’ cost, and it is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 F. 525, 5 C.C.A. 207, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-t-lunn-co-v-cameron-ca5-1893.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack