Peirce v. American Express Co.
This text of 96 N.E. 1026 (Peirce v. American Express Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The plaintiff shipped his property by the defendant to the Fosdick Company and left it to that company to send it back to him without any special instructions or any special authority as to the contract which it should make. That authorized the Fosdick Company to make the usual shipping [387]*387agreement with the defendant; and all the evidence is that it did so. Certainly there was no evidence to the contrary. Accordingly the plaintiff is bound by the terms of the agreement on which the defendant received and transported the property; there was no evidence on which the plaintiff could recover more than the sum named in that agreement; and there must be judgment on the verdict.
So ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
96 N.E. 1026, 210 Mass. 383, 1912 Mass. LEXIS 977, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peirce-v-american-express-co-mass-1912.