US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

HUMPHREYS V. PERRY, 148 U. S. 627 (1893)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 148 U. S. 627 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Humphreys v. Perry, 148 U.S. 627 (1893)

Humphreys v. Perry

No. 167

Argued and submitted March 23-24, 1893

Decided April 10, 1893

148 U.S. 627


A traveling salesman for a jewelry firm bought a passenger ticket for a passage on a railroad, and presented a trunk to be checked to the place of his destination without informing the agent of the company that the trunk contained jewelry, which it did, and without being inquired of by the agent as to what it contained. He paid a charge for overweight as personal baggage, and the trunk was checked. It was of a dark color, iron bound, and of the kind known as a jeweler's trunk. It had been a practice for jewelry merchants to send out agents with trunks filled with goods, the trunks being of similar character to the one in question, and, as a rule, they were checked as personal baggage. But there was no evidence tending to show that the railroad companies, or their agents, knew what the trunks contained.


(1) There was no evidence showing, or tending to show, that the agent chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 148 U. S. 628

of the railroad had any actual knowledge of the contents of the trunk.

(2) There was no evidence from which it could fairly be said that the agent had reason to believe that the trunk contained jewelry.

(3) The agent was not required to inquire as to the contents of the trunk, so presented as personal baggage.

(4) The company was not liable for the loss of the contents of the trunk.

The cases on the subject reviewed.

The case is stated in the opinion.

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™