Leigh Ellis & Co. v. Davis, 260 U.S. 682 (1923)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 260 U.S. 677, click here.

Leigh Ellis & Co. v. Davis

No. 246

Argued January 18, 19, 1923
Decided January 29, 1923
260 U.S. 682

ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Syllabus

1. Section 206(a) of the Transportation Act, providing that actions against the agent designated by the President shall be brought not later than two years from the passage of the act, did not set aside a shorter limitation provided in existing bills of lading. P. 688.

2. A stipulation in a bill of lading that actions for loss, damage or delay shall be instituted only within two years and one day after delivery of the goods, or in case of failure to make delivery, then within two years and one day after a reasonable time for delivery has elapsed, is reasonable and valid. P. 689.

3. A decision of the Interstate Commerce Commission that such a stipulation was unreasonable, held not binding in this case. P. 689.

4. The reasonableness of such a limitation is a matter of law. P. 689.

5. When not affected by statute, a limitation prescribed by contract like the above applies to the action which is prosecuted to judgment, and is not extended by the bringing of a previous action. P. 689.

6. An agreement limiting the time for bringing actions against the carrier "for loss, damage or delay" of goods shipped applies to claims that the goods delivered were short of the weight specified in the bills of lading. P. 689.

276 F. 400 affirmed.

Error to a judgment affirming a judgment of the district court dismissing the petition in an action by the transferee of bills of lading for failure to deliver the full weight of cotton covered by them.