Hofford v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad

Citations

• 43 Pa. Super. 303
• 1910 Pa. Super. LEXIS 45

Syllabus

<p>Bailment — Carriers—Warehouseman—Degree of care — Burden of proof — Measure of damages.</p> <p>1. Where a railroad company accepts the baggage of an intending passenger and deposits it in the place provided by the company for the purpose of checking and for safe-keeping, and subsequently the passenger changes his mind as to making the journey, and without having bought a ticket, goes for his baggage which is not forthcoming, and it appears that the company in the course of its business charged storage where there was such a change of intention, the company is not a gratuitous bailee of the baggage, and the burden is upon it, whether it is in the position of a carrier or warehouseman, to show that the baggage was not lost through its own negligence. Mere proof that the baggage had been placed in a proper building, in charge of trusty servants, and properly guarded, is not sufficient to rebut the presumption of negligence arising from the nondelivery, of the baggage to its owner.</p> <p>2. In such a case the railroad company is in the position of a warehouseman under the laws of New York, and the law of New York approved June 6, 1907, and known as the “Public Service Commissions Law of New York,” limiting the amount of liability by a carrier for baggage to $150 has no application.</p> <p>3. Where baggage is left with a carrier in anticipation of a journey not about to be commenced, and to be called for and checked when the passenger is ready to begin his journey, the carrier is liable therefor as a warehouseman only.</p> <p>4. In a suit against á carrier for the loss of clothing contained in a trunk, the measure of damages is not the amount which the clothing would bring if put into the market and sold for secondhand clothing. The rule is the value of the clothing for use by the owner.</p>