Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Carriers - Liability Of Interstate Connecting Carriers Governed By Filed Tariff Or Through Bill Of Lading Jan 1933

Carriers - Liability Of Interstate Connecting Carriers Governed By Filed Tariff Or Through Bill Of Lading

Michigan Law Review

Goods were shipped from Maine to El Paso, Texas, on a through bill of lading which provided that the carrier in possession of the property described "shall be liable as at common law for any loss thereof or damage thereto." The goods were destroyed by fire, without negligence, while in the possession of the Galveston Wharf Company. This company owned, in addition to certain piers, railroad trackage from these piers to connections with the delivering carrier and other railroads running out of Galveston. Its filed tariff provided that it should be liable only for negligence. Held, the Wharf Company's …


Carriers-Statute Of Limitations For Bringing Suit For Injury To Goods Dec 1927

Carriers-Statute Of Limitations For Bringing Suit For Injury To Goods

Michigan Law Review

A recent case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States suggests the query-ls there a federal statute of limitations for bringing suit for injury to goods in an interstate shipment? The answer depends on the interpretation of the Cummins Amendment of March 4, 1915 and the Transportation Act of 1920. The relevant and germane provision of these acts as to the time limit for commencing suit for injury to goods on an interstate carriage is "That it shall be unlawful for any such common carrier to provide by rule, contract, or regulation a shorter period for giving notice …


Note And Comment, Edwin C. Goddard, George Seletto, Edson R. Sunderland, Victor H. Lane, Burke Shartel, George E. Longstaff May 1922

Note And Comment, Edwin C. Goddard, George Seletto, Edson R. Sunderland, Victor H. Lane, Burke Shartel, George E. Longstaff

Michigan Law Review

Carriers - Second Cummins Amendment - It was seven years after the Carmack Amendment of the Hepburn Act of i9o6 before the Supreme Court began that series of decisions, extending from Adams Express Co. v. Croninger, 226 U. S. 491 (1913), to George N. Pierce Co. v. Wells, Fargo & Co., 236 U. S. 278 (1915), which directly resulted in the First Cummins Amendment of March, 1915. One has only to read those cases, reviewed in 13 Micn. L. REv. 59o, and other notes referred to in 17 MICH. L. Rzv. 183, to see that the language of the Cummins …


Carmack Amendment In The State Courts, Wayland H. Sanford Feb 1917

Carmack Amendment In The State Courts, Wayland H. Sanford

Michigan Law Review

Prior to the leading case of Adams Express Co. v. Croninger,'- decided January 6th, 1913, there was much diversity in the decisions of the state courts as to the validity of contracts between shippers and carriers limiting the amount of the carrier's liability for injuries to goods shipped. Such limitations were held valid in some states, but invalid in others, and in some were declared invalid by statutes or constitutional provisions.2 State rules were applied to interstate as well as intrastate shipments, it being supposed that Congress had not legislated upon the subject. The CARMACK AmlNDVNT of i9o6s provided that …