Searles v. Alabama & Vicksburg Railway Co.

Citations

• 69 Miss. 186

Syllabus

<p>1. Railroads. Carrier of freight. Damages. Presumption.</p> <p>In'an action against the initial carrier for negligently loading goods in unsafe cars, whereby they reached their destination on a connecting line damaged by being wet, proof of defendant’s universal habit to carefully inspect cars before sending them out will not justify a peremptory instruction for defendant, if there is also evidence that the goods were received by it in good condition and loaded into cars, the seals of which remained unbroken, the contents being undisturbed throughout the journey, but being found damaged by wet on reaching the destination, caused presumably by loading in unsuitable cars.</p> <p>2. Same. Conflicting presumptions. Question of fact.</p> <p>In such case the presumption as to the fitness of the cars, arising out of the proof of their inspection, is opposed by the presumption, of' unsuitableness, arising out of the evidence that their contents became wet although in sealed cars. Under such circumstances, whether the cars were secure as originally furnished is for the jury to decide under all the evidence.</p>