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.
Noah Root, Respondent, v. The Great Western Railway Company, Appellant, 1873 — 55 N.Y. 636 · caselaw · US
General
Noah Root, Respondent, v. The Great Western Railway Company, Appellant
55 N.Y. 636·New York Court of Appeals·1873·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
Noah Root, Respondent, v. The Great Western Railway Company, Appellant.
(Argued November 11, 1873;
decided November 18, 1873.)
. This was an action against defendant, as a common carrier, to recover the value of property lost after delivery to it for transportation.
On the 14th April, 1866, plaintiff shipped by New York Central- Railroad, at Victor, New York, a chest- of tools marked “Noah Root (plaintiff), Bear Creek, Branch county, Michigan.” The mode of transportation was for the New York Central Railroad to carry it to Suspension Bridge, and there deliver it to defendant, to be transported to Detroit, and there to be delivered to the Michigan Southern Railroad Company.
For the purpose of proving the delivery of the property to defendant, plaintiff proved that defendant had an agent at Detroit whose business it was to receive, at that place, all freight brought by defendant, to be delivered to the Michigan Southern Railroad Company. That such agent kept a book in which all such freight was entered; and after such entry the freight was delivered to and receipted for in the same book by the agents of the Michigan Southern Railroad t ompany. Plaintiff then introduced in evidence said book, which contained this entry, under date of April 21, 1866: “ Car 303, Noah Root, Bear Creek, Branch county, Michigan, one box of goods.” This was received under objection. Held, no error ; that the book was competent evidence, and wasj'prima faeie proof of the receipt of the goods by defendant, and the carriage thereof to Detroit; and inasmuch as no receipt for the goods, signed by the agent of the Michigan Southern Railroad Company, appeared in the book, that such entry furnished no proof of such delivery.
George F. Danforth for the appellant.
John Van Voorhis for the respondent.
[MAJORITY — Grover, J.,]
Grover, J.,
reads for affirmance.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.