Story Case

Donald Ellis bought a passenger ticket in Chattanooga, Tennessee, to New Orleans, for carriage over three roads, the last being the St. Louis and Gulf Railroad Company. When Ellis arrived in New Orleans he demanded his trunk, but it could not be found. He held a check, by which the connecting companies limited their liability for baggage to $50 on each ticket. Ellis demanded $500 from the St. Louis and Gulf Railroad to cover the loss of drawings and specifications for a new invention which were contained in the trunk.

The railroad company refused to pay anything, on the ground that it had never received the trunk, and, second, in any case, that liability was limited by the contract to $50. What can Ellis do to satisfy his claim?

Ruling Court Case. Blossom Vs. Dodd's Express Company, Volume 43 New York Reports, Page 264

Blossom delivered one valise and a gun case to Dodd's Express Company and received two checks from the company. Each check contained a clause limiting the liability of the company to $100, unless the company expressly consented to a greater liability. The train upon which Blossom was riding at the time he received the checks was so dark that he could not read the small print contained thereon. His valise, containing clothing worth $260, was stolen and this was an action to recover its value.

Chief Justice Church delivered the opinion: "To limit liability on the part of the carrier, there must be an express contract. When a bill of lading contains a limited liability clause, the nature of the business is such that the shipper is presumed to know that the bill contains the terms upon which the property is to be carried, but the baggage check is not of such a character, and this presumption does not hold. The plaintiff could not read the small print, and did not agree to the terms set forth on the checks. Therefore, the limiting clause does not bind him." Judgment is given for Blossom.

Ruling Law. Story Case Answer

A common carrier is bound to take the baggage of the passenger on his journey. This includes his wearing apparel, a reasonable amount of money for traveling expenses, hooks for instruction or amusement. In the case of a tradesman or a carpenter, it includes tools for personal use; for one going on a hunting or fishing expedition, it includes his equipment. The carrier's duty in respect to baggage is the same as for other goods, and it is excused for loss only by showing that loss was caused by the act of God or a public enemy. The difference between the liability of the carrier for the safety to the passenger and for his baggage should be noted. For the passenger the carrier must exercise his highest degree of care, and if that is done no liability follows; but for his baggage, the carrier is liable as an insurer. Thus, if a robber should board the train and, notwithstanding due precaution on the part of the carrier, should injure the passenger and take his baggage, the carrier is liable for the loss of the baggage, but not for the injury to the passenger.

The term baggage does not include large sums of moneys, or any property of unusual value, for the reason that the carrier is entitled to reasonable compensation for assuming this added risk. Unless a special contract is made to carry these articles of great value, the company is not liable for their loss or injury. Although the carrier is liable only for the loss of ordinary baggage, it is held that it cannot limit its Common Law liability with reference thereto by a notice. A baggage check is considered by the courts as a mere means of identification for the passenger, and unless it can be shown that he consented to the terms stated thereon, he is not bound thereby.

There are three rules with reference to liability for loss when baggage has been carried over several routes. When baggage has been carried over several connecting railroads, and the passenger discovers at the end of the journey that his property has been lost or damaged, he is generally permitted to hold the last carrier, because the goods were found injured in his hands, or for his failure to deliver, in case of total loss. This rule is based upon the fact that the passenger is, to a degree, helpless as against the carriers and needs this protection. But if the last carrier proves that he never received the baggage, the rule will not operate against him and the passenger must seek his reimbursement from the actual source of loss.

In the Story Case, Ellis cannot recover from the loss of his drawings and specifications, but he can recover from the St. Louis and Gulf Railroad the actual value of his ordinary baggage, unless it expressly shows that the property was never received by it.

In Accordance with the Cummins Act, enacted by Congress, March 4, 1915, the Interstate Commerce Commission has made a ruling, providing that railroads should charge for the transportation of baggage whose value is in excess of $100. Travelers are obliged to state the value of their baggage in valuation vouchers, and, where the amount is above $100, are charged therefor at the rate of ten cents for each $100. The old limitation of $100 value to each piece of baggage is removed, and the "insurance" feature substituted, whereby, when loss occurs, the actual value of the property is paid to the owner.