Mayflower Dairy Products, Inc. v. Fidelity-Phenix Fire Insurance

170 Misc. 2, 9 N.Y.S.2d 892, 1938 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2338
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedDecember 20, 1938
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 170 Misc. 2 (Mayflower Dairy Products, Inc. v. Fidelity-Phenix Fire Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Mayflower Dairy Products, Inc. v. Fidelity-Phenix Fire Insurance, 170 Misc. 2, 9 N.Y.S.2d 892, 1938 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2338 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Transportation or in transit as applied to a seller making its own deliveries to customers means the movement of the loaded conveyance carrying the goods from the starting point or seller’s premises to the point of destination or place of delivery to the buyer or customer. While there may be some reasonable deviation, such as temporary stops, incidental to the process of delivery or necessary for those engaged in same, or even the return of undelivered goods, transportation or in transit implies the continuous action of moving the goods from the one point and putting them down in another. In our opinion in transit cannot include a period commencing on the evening of one day when for its own convenience the seller in its own premises loads the goods on its truck, and extending then on through the night during which the loaded truck is stored in such premises on to that time in the morning of the next day when the truck is manned and proceeds on its way to the point of destination. Such a situation implies storage.

Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and judgment directed for defendant, with costs.

All concur. Present — Lydon, Hammer and Shientag, JJ.

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

Related

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Hutson Construction Co.
544 S.W.2d 762 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1976)
Citron v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
86 Misc. 26 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1976)
Irv-Bob Formal Wear, Inc. v. Public Service Mutual Insurance
81 Misc. 2d 422 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1975)
Boonton Handbag Co. v. Home Ins. Co.
310 A.2d 510 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1973)
Franklin v. Washington General Insurance
62 Misc. 2d 965 (New York Supreme Court, 1970)
Den Gre Plastics Co., Inc. v. Travelers Indem.
259 A.2d 485 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1969)
Simons v. Niagara Fire Insurance Company
398 S.W.2d 833 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1966)
Ben Pulitzer Creations, Inc. v. Phoenix Insurance
47 Misc. 2d 801 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1965)
Brown v. American Casualty Co. of Reading
34 Pa. D. & C.2d 204 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1964)
Dealers Dairy Products Co. v. Royal Ins.
170 Ohio St. (N.S.) 336 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
170 Misc. 2, 9 N.Y.S.2d 892, 1938 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2338, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayflower-dairy-products-inc-v-fidelity-phenix-fire-insurance-nyappterm-1938.