Skip to main content
· 10/15/1908

Grenada Cotton Compress Co. v. Atkinson

Citations

  • 94 Miss. 93
  • 47 So. 644

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence. Books showing business transactions.</p> <p>An entry made In a book used for that purpose by one person in tbe regular course of business, recording an oral or written report made to bifn by another in tbe regular course of business, of a transaction lying in tbe personal knowledge, of tbe latter, is admissible in evidtence, where tbe practical inconvenience of producing on tbe stand the numerous persons concerned would, in tbe particular case, outweigh tbe probable utility of so doing.</p> <p>2. Warehousemen. Injury to goods. Limitation of liability. Adjustment before removal of property. Waiver of provision.</p> <p>Where the dealings between warehousemen and tbe owners of cotton stored with them showed that tbe parties bad disregarded a provision' in the warehouse receipts that all claims for damages against tbe warehousemen should be adjudicated before tbe cotton was removed, tbe provision could not be set up as a defense by the warehousemen in an action for damages brought after tbe removal of tbe cotton.</p> <p>3. Same. Receipts. Construction. Fire and water exception.</p> <p>A clause in a warehouse receipt exempting the warehousemen from liability for loss by fire and water did not cover damage from exposure to the ordinary action of the elements, but related to damages from some disaster produced by fire or flood in the nature of an overwhelming catastrophe.</p> <p>4. Same. Damage to goods. Action for. Evidence.</p> <p>In an action for damages to certain lots of cotton, described in a bill of particulars, while stored in defendant’s warehouse, each bale of which was evidenced by a separate compress receipt, testimony showing the damage to all the cotton, and identifying the damaged bales as the identical cotton delivered to defendant and described in the bill of particulars, and that the damage resulted through defendant’s negligent handling of the same, was sufficient, and it was not necessary to prove the particular damage to each separate b

Judges: Eletciier

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.