ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
PLANT CITY GROWERS' ASSOCIATION, A CORPORATION, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment for a shipper against a railroad company, finding insufficient evidence of the berries' condition at delivery and that the shipper contributed to the loss through delayed unloading.
No, the railroad was not liable for the entire loss. The evidence did not clearly establish the berries' condition at delivery, and the delay in unloading by the consignee contributed to the loss.
“In an action to recover damages for an alleged negligent delay in the interstate transportation of a car load of strawberries to market, the evidence as to the alleged “good condition” of the berries at delivery to the carrier, was indefinite”
Establishes the court's finding regarding the evidence of the berries' condition.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA shipper sued a railroad for negligent delay in transporting strawberries. The evidence regarding the berries' condition at delivery was indefinite. …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Interstate Transportation cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
— In an action to recover damages for an alleged negligent delay in the interstate transportation of a car load of strawberries to market, the evidence as to the alleged “good condition” of the berries at delivery to the carrier, was indefinite; and, if a negligent delay in the transportation and delivery by the carrier at destination be conceded on the evidence, there is clear evidence that the delay was not very great and that the berries were not completely unloaded for several days after the delivery of the car containing them to the consignee; therefore, the carrier was manifestly not liable for all the loss sustained by reason of the depreciation in value of the barlúes, a portion of which obviously is due to delay in unloading the berries after the car containing them had been delivered to the consignee at destination; and as the recovery is apparently for the entire loss sustained by the shipper, the judgment should be reversed for a new trial, there being in the record no data upon which to permit a remittitur. On another trial the charges of the court should be confined to the issues made by the plea dings and the evidence adduced thereunder, applying the law as to interstate shipments. A. C. L. v. Sandlin, 75 Fla. 539, 78 South. Rep. 667; F. E. C. Ry. v. Davis, 76 Fla. 344, 79 South. Rep. 637.
Reversed.
All concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Sandlin, 75 Fla. 539 (Fla. 1918)
- Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Ardenia Davis and Samuel C. Davis, 76 Fla. 344 (Fla. 1918)