Bast v. Platt

Citations

• 55 Pa. Super. 618
• 1914 Pa. Super. LEXIS 25

Syllabus

<p>Carriers — Common carriers — Conflict of laws — Pennsylvania and federal law.</p> <p>1. Where the consignor and consignee of a shipment by express are both residents of Pennsylvania, and the contract of shipment is made and is to be fully performed within the limits of this state, and the loss of the goods occurs in this state, the liability of the express company for damages is to be determined by the laws of Pennsylvania, and not by the laws of the United States.</p> <p>Carriers — Common carriers — Declaration as to value.</p> <p>2. In an action against an express company to recover for loss of a package of rings, a verdict for the full value of the rings will be sustained, although a limitation of liability to $50.00 appears in the receipt for the goods, where the.evidence shows that the rings were sent by a firm of jewelers in Philadelphia for inspection to plaintiff’s residence in a town in Pennsylvania; that the outside wrapper showed that the package came from jewelers and had been carried for'the sum of twenty-five cents; that in returning them plaintiff used the same box with new wrapping paper and addressed it to the same jewelry firm; that she took the package to the defendant’s agent, and showed him the original wrapping paper; that the agent asked her if she desired to fix the value of the package; that she replied that she did not, as no value had been fixed when it was sent to her, but that it was a valuable package; that the agent without further demand or inquiry received the package, accepted twenty-five cents from her, and gave her a receipt therefor, and that the package was subsequently lost through the negligence of the express company.</p>