Michigan Central Railroad v. Curtis

Citations

• 80 Ill. 324

Syllabus

<p>1. Carries—liability for delay in delivering to succeeding line. If fruit trees and shrubbery are destroyed by the cold, in the hands of an intermediate carrier, by reason of negligence or unreasonable delay, or if, by such delay in transportation or in delivering to the next carrier in the line, the latter can not, by reasonable efforts, transport and deliver before they are destroyed by cold weather, the former carrier will be liable for the loss.</p> <p>2. Although a carrier may be guilty of unreasonable delay in transportation, he will not be liable for a loss caused by cold weather, if he delivers the freight to the next company in the line in sufficient time for it, by reasonable diligence, to transport and deliver to the consignee before injury by the cold.</p> <p>3. • Same—excuse for delay in delivery to next carrier. Where fruit and ornamental trees shipped were destroyed by frost before reaching their destination, and this was caused by delay of transportation to Chicago, where they were to pass into the hands of another line, the fact that the company’s buildings in Chicago were destroyed by fire, will not furnish a sufficient excuse for the delay, where it appears that other shipments, made afterwards, went through in time, and were delivered to the other line.</p> <p>4. Same—delivery to succeeding line. Where it is the custom of a railway company, to whom freight is delivered in the car of another line for transportation, not to receive and forward the same until expense bills are delivered by the preceding line, with directions, the first company, being conversant with the rule, can not be regarded as having delivered a car of freight before complying with such custom, and thus exonerate itself from loss occasioned by the delay.</p>