Yaeck v. Adams Express Co.

Citations

• 69 Pa. Super. 143
• 1918 Pa. Super. LEXIS 34

Syllabus

<p>Gamers — Express companies' — Receipt—Interstate commerce.</p> <p>A State court cannot pass upon the question of the unreasonableness of a uniform express receipt for interstate shipments filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission with the schedules of the company. Such a question arises under the Federal law, and the operation and effect of the contract as shown by the receipt must be determined in accordance with such law.</p> <p>Where an express company’s receipt for a package states that the property is accepted as merchandise only, and states that the company will not be liable for the loss of jewelry unless such articles are enumerated in the receipt, and the package in fact contains jewelry, although this is not mentioned in the receipt, the company cannot be held liable for the loss of the package either as “jewelry,” or as “merchandise.”</p> <p>The terms of such a receipt are not inconsistent with the rule that the carrier cannot exempt himself from liability for the negligence of himself or of his employee.</p>