Hyperlawhypertext legal database Seacoast Lumber Co. v. Clyde Steamship Co. 133 N.Y.S. 303

← Cases

Seacoast Lumber Co. v. Clyde Steamship Co.

133 N.Y.S. 303 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1912-01-19 English

Delivered by CLARKE, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 303
SEACOAST LUMBER CO. v. CLYDE S. S. CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
January 19, 1912.)

Headnote

Shipping (§ 141[1] )—Cabbiage of Goods—Loss by Fire—Liability of Gabbier.
Under a bill of lading providing that, “if all or any part of said property is carried by water over any part of said route,” such water carriage should be subject to the condition that the carrier should not be liable for damage from fire, the fact that the goods were transported a part of the route by railroad before being loaded on shipboard would not prevent the application of the exemption from liability in case the goods were destroyed by fire while in the water carrier’s possession.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Shipping, Cent. Dig. §§ 497-499; Dec. Dig. § 141.*]
Submission of controversy without action by the Seacoast Lumber Company against the Clyde Steamship Company. Judgment for defendant.
■ The goods were shipped by rail to Jacksonville, Fla., and were then loaded upon one of defendant’s steamships for transportation to Boston, and were destroyed by fire while in defendant’s warehouse within 48 hours after arrival, and before notice thereof had been given to the consignee. The bill of lading provided, among other things, that, “if all or any part of said property is carried by water over any part of said route, such water carriage shall be performed subject to the liabilities, limitations, and exemptions provided by statute, and to the conditions contained in this bill of lading, not inconsistent with such statutes, or this section, and subject also to the condition that no such carrier or party in possession shall be liable for any loss or damage resulting from fire,” etc.
Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J., and LAUGHLIN, CLARKE, SCOTT, and MILLER, JJ.
Harrington, Bigham & Englar (Henry J. Bigham, of counsel), for plaintiff.
Burlingham, Montgomery & Beecher (Norman B. Beecher, of counsel, and Ray Rood Allen, on the brief), for defendant.

In this case the facts are similar to those presented in Jennings v. Clyde Steamship Co., 133 N. Y. Supp. 298 , decided herewith, with the exception that the goods Were first transported by railroad to Jacksonville, Fla., and were there loaded upon the Onondaga, and were transported to Boston on the same voyage, and were destroyed in the same fire, under a similar bill of lading. The partial transportation by rail, preliminary to the transport by water, creates no different situation, and for the reasons stated in the Jennings- Case judgment should be directed for the defendant, with costs. All concur.