Bank of Water Valley v. Southern Exp. Co.

• Decision Date: 09 April 1894
• Citation: 16 So. 300,71 Miss. 741
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: BANK OF WATER VALLEY v. SOUTHERN EXPRESS CO

16 So. 300

71 Miss. 741

BANK OF WATER VALLEY v. SOUTHERN EXPRESS CO

Supreme Court of Mississippi

April 9, 1894

FROM the circuit court of the second district of Yalobusha county. HON. EUGENE JOHNSON, Judge.

Action by the Bank of Water Valley against the Southern Express Company to recover $ 1,048, damages for the alleged negligence of defendant in failing to promptly deliver a package containing a check for that amount. On December 17 1891, after the only train going to Water Valley from Greenville had left, the package was delivered by the Bank of Greenville to the defendant company at Greenville, Miss. to be transported to appellant at Water Valley, Miss. No notice was given the defendant of its contents. On the back of the envelope was written the words, "$ 50 value--documents." The agent of defendant gave a receipt for the package in the usual form, the blanks therein having been filled out by the shipper, showing that the package was of the value of $ 50, and contained "documents." The package was sent from Greenville by the first express-train after it was received, arriving at Water Valley on Friday night, December 18. On the trial the defendant's agent at Water Valley testified that he notified the cashier of the bank of its arrival on the morning of Saturday, December 19. This the cashier denied asserting that he knew nothing of the arrival of the package until it was delivered on Monday morning following. The cheek represented money which the Bank of Greenville had collected for the Bank of Water Valley, and was drawn on the Whitney National Bank, of New Orleans, La. It was delivered to the Bank of Water Valley on Monday morning, and was by it forwarded by that day's mail to its correspondents Bickham & Moore, in New Orleans, for collection. They received it on Tuesday morning, and if they had presented it promptly, it would have been paid. Between two and three o'clock of that day the Bank of Greenville, drawer of the draft, failed. The check was protested for non-payment some time in the afternoon of Tuesday; but there was evidence that payment was not refused until the next morning. The record fails to show any reason why Bickham & Moore failed to present the check more promptly. Plaintiff sustained a loss to the amount of the check, the Bank of Greenville being insolvent. On the trial the court gave a peremptory instruction for defendant. Verdict and judgment accordingly. After motion for new trial overruled, plaintiff appealed.

Affirmed.

I. T Blount, for appellant.

Defendant's...