Pierce v. Winsor

19 F. Cas. 652, 2 Sprague 35
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
DecidedMay 15, 1861
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 19 F. Cas. 652 (Pierce v. Winsor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pierce v. Winsor, 19 F. Cas. 652, 2 Sprague 35 (circtdma 1861).

Opinion

.SPRAGUE, District Judge.

In Brass v. Maitland, 6 El. & Bl. 470, the chief justice evidently took the view that the shipper of goods in a general ship impliedly contracts that the goods shipped shall not be injurious to other goods shipped in the usual course of lading a ship, and that this rule is not affected by the fact that the skipper had innocently shipped dangerous goods without knowledge of their true character. This principle is a sound one. It throws the loss upon the party who generally has the best means of informing himself as to the character of the article shipped. A different rule might encourage negligence on the part of the shipper, and even induce him to try experiments with articles unknown to commerce, if he could set up his ignorance of the real character of the articles as a defence to any damage caused by the shipment This ease is not between the shipper and the shipowner; but the rule applies equally well to the ease of a charterer. He hires the whole ship, and has a right to put on board a full cargo, and he must not put on board goods which will injure the ship, and cause her owners to become responsible to other shippers for damage done. Decree for libellant for money paid by him for other goods damaged, and for extra expense incurred in getting out the mastic.

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

Related

Hanna v. Pitt & Scott (Ltd.)
121 A.D. 420 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1907)
Barney v. Burnstenbinder
64 Barb. 212 (New York Supreme Court, 1872)
Barney v. Burstenbinder
7 Lans. 210 (New York Supreme Court, 1872)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 F. Cas. 652, 2 Sprague 35, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pierce-v-winsor-circtdma-1861.