Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
John Redpath et al., Apellants, v. Thomas T. Vaughan et al., Respondents, 1871 — 48 N.Y. 655 · caselaw · US
General
John Redpath et al., Apellants, v. Thomas T. Vaughan et al., Respondents
48 N.Y. 655·New York Commission of Appeals·1871·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
John Redpath et al., Apellants, v. Thomas T. Vaughan et al., Respondents.
(Argued May 12, 1871;
decided September term, 1871.)
Action to recover damages to a cargo of sugar in defendants’ custody as common carriers. The bill of lading excepted “ dangers of the sea.” The boat was towed upon a hidden stump, a recent obstruction in the channel of the Hudson river, and sunk. Held, the loss occurred by a danger of the sea, and defendants were not liable.
Livingston K. Miller for the appellants.
Joseph Potter for the respondents.'
[MAJORITY]
Gray, C., reads for affirmance.
All concur. Judgment affirmed, with costs.