Skip to main content
· 1/5/1904

Swan v. Western Union Telegraph Co.

Citations

  • 129 F. 318
  • 67 L.R.A. 153
  • 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4047

Syllabus

<p>1. Telegraphs — Messages—Transmission—Delay—Notification to Sendee— Negligence.</p> <p>Where a mining expert delivered a telegram to defendant telegraph company advising the purchase of certain mining stock, which message he directed to be transmitted to plaintiff and 293 others, who were his clients, under an agreement to transmit the same at once, there being other methods of rapid communication between the sending office and plaintiff’s place of business, it was the duty of the telegraph company, on discovering that it would not be able to transmit such message to plaintiff without delay, by reason of a defect in its wires, to promptly notify the sender of such fact, he being a person well known to the company’s agents at the sending office, and easily accessible.</p> <p>2. Same — Damages.</p> <p>Where a mining expert delivered a message to a telegraph company to be sent to plaintiff, his client, advising the purchase of certain mining stock, which defendant agreed to promptly transmit, but failed to notify either the sender or the addressee that there had been several hours’ delay, by reason of which the addressee was led to purchase the stock at a higher price than he would have been compelled to pay if the message had been promptly delivered before the close of an exchange on the day it was sent, the addressee was entitled to recover the difference between what he had to pay for the stock which he purchased the succeeding day and what the stock would have cost him if the telegram had been transmitted within a reasonable time after it was received for transmission.</p> <p>j[ 1. Delay in delivery of telegram, failure to disclose that line was not in working order, see note to Pacific Postal Telegraph Cable Go. v. Fleischner, 14 C. C. A. 177.</p> <p>f 2. Measure of damages in actions against telegraph companies, see notes to Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Coggin, 15 C. C. A. 235; Same v. Morris, 28 C. C. A. 59.</p> <p>See Telegraphs and Telephones, vol. 45, Ce

Judges: Bunn

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.