United States Watch Case Co. v. Southern Express Co.

27 S.E. 74, 120 N.C. 351
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided February 5, 1897·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

ClaeK, J.:

The stipulation that the defendant should not be liable for loss or damage, unless demand was made in writing within thirty days from the date of bill of lading, was held an unreasonable restriction of the common law liability of a common carrier and void in Cigar Co. v. Express Co., ante. Rut, aside from that, the defendant waived this stipulation and is estopped by answering plaintiff’s demand for return of the package that it was searching for it, and then, when it was found, accepting plaintiff’s instruction to sell the same. It was not until July, 1893, that the defendant notified the plaintiff that the package was stolen. The demand' in writing was made within 30 days, and action was brough-r within 3 years (The Code, 155, (1) after that date.

No Error.

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

United States Watch Case Co. v. Southern Express Co., 27 S.E. 74, 120 N.C. 351 (N.C. 1897).

27 S.E. 74 (United States Watch Case Co. v. Southern Express Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Spengler v. Employers Commercial Union Insurance
206 S.E.2d 693 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
Forney v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.
83 S.E. 686 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1914)
Southern Ry. Co. v. Mooresville Cotton Mills
187 F. 72 (Fourth Circuit, 1911)
Deans v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
67 S.E. 332 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1910)
Mfg. Co. v. . R. R.
38 S.E. 894 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1901)
Gwyn Harper Manufacturing Co. v. Carolina Central Railroad
128 N.C. 280 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1901)