Freeman v. Louisville & Nashville R. R.

Citations

• 32 Fla. 420

Syllabus

<p>VESSELS — DAJIA&ES FOR DETENTION OF — PLEADINGS.</p> <p>Where the owner of a ship sues a connecting railway carrier for damages for the detention of his vessel at the railway’s terminal wharf, in consequence of the latter’s alleged suspension in the receipt of such ship’s caigo, and discloses by his declaration , that such ship was under charter with a third person, not a party to the suit, to deliver her cargo to the defendant railway company, and that the railway company was under contract with such third ¡person there to receive such cargo and the same to carry further: Held, That under these circumstances, the defendant railway company’s duty to receive and carry the cargo was due directly and primarily to such third person, the charterer of the ship, and that lie alone could properly sue for the breach of such duty. And that under these circumstances, if the plaintiff’s ship was wrongfully delayed in consequence of .the negligence of the railway company, as the agent of the charterer, such charterer, as principal, was directly and primarily responsible to the plaintiff as the ship’s owner for her delay in consequence of his railway agent’s wrongful suspension from receiving her cargo, and was the proper person for the plaintiff to have sued for his damage. Where a declaration discloses such a state of facts, and fails further, in a separate count, not otherwise objectionable, to allege that the suspension in the receipt of the cargo complained of was wrongful, and ■ fails to allege any facts from which it could appear that the alleged suspension was either tortious or inexcusable, a demurrer thereto is properly sustained.</p>