Tort Law

This page within Virginia Tort Case Law is a compilation of cases reported by the Virginia Supreme Court and summarized by Brien Roche dealing with the topic of Goods Damaged and the related topic of vehicle accidents.   For more information on damaged goods see the pages on Wikipedia.

Goods Damaged-Statutes

See Va. Code § 8.7-309 (UCC) indicating that carrier who issues bill of lading must exercise degree of care which reasonably careful man would exercise under like circumstances.

See Va. Code § 56-123 as to adjustment of claims against carriers.

See Va. Code § 56-124 as to use of affidavits and depositions in actions on such claims.

Goods Damaged-Cases

1975 Greyhound Lines v. Mah, 216 Va. 401, 219 S.E.2d 842.

Plaintiff lost baggage on interstate trip. Fact that defendant did not transport plaintiff and her baggage on through bus does not deprive defendant of benefit of tariff provision limiting its liability.

1974 Phillip Morris, Inc. v. Old Dominion Freight Line, 215 Va. 169, 207 S.E.2d 851.

Common carrier is insurer responsible for safe carriage and delivery of cargo. Terminal company advised carrier that trailer could not be unloaded until next day; carrier elected to leave trailer at terminal. Since carrier could have removed it and contents from terminal property, delivery was not complete.

1974 Norfolk Term. Corp. v. United States Lines, 215 Va. 80, 205 S.E.2d 400.

At common law, carrier is absolutely liable for safe carriage and delivery of its cargo; only exceptions occurring when carrier is able affirmatively to prove that cargo was damaged or destroyed by act of shipper, act of God, act of public enemy, act of public authority, or inherent nature of cargo. Congress has added certain exceptions under Harter Act, 46 U.S.C. § 192, and similar provisions of Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, 46 U.S.C. § 1304. No exceptions here.

1973 Sydnor & Hundley v. Wilson, 213 Va. 704, 194 S.E.2d 733.

Suit for non-delivery of goods by carrier. Purchaser was third party beneficiary entitled to bring suit. Nine-month notice requirement as to claims was reasonable.

1949 Smith v. Pippin, 188 Va. 869, 51 S.E.2d 159.

Goods damaged.Interstate Commerce Act provides that carrier may, upon undertaking to transport goods at lower rate fixed by schedule, enter into agreement limiting amount of recovery for damage to value declared in writing by shipper or agreed upon by him in writing as released value of goods. Such agreement need not be signed.

1943 Peninsula Transit Corp. v. Jacoby, 181 Va. 697, 26 S.E.2d 97.

Goods damaged.Courts recognize right of carrier to limit its liability for loss of baggage by special contract or by regulation authorized by utility commission.