Conklin v. Canadian-Colonial Airways, Inc.

CourtNew York Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtCRANE
Citation194 N.E. 692,266 N.Y. 244
PartiesCONKLIN v. CANADIAN-COLONIAL AIRWAYS, Inc.
Decision Date26 February 1935

266 N.Y. 244
194 N.E. 692

CONKLIN
v.
CANADIAN-COLONIAL AIRWAYS, Inc.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Feb. 26, 1935.


Action by Peggy C. Conklin, as administratrix ad prosequendum of the estate of Arthur V. Conklin, deceased, against the Canadian-Colonial Airways, Incorporated. From a judgment of the Appellate Division (242 App. Div. 625, 271 N. Y. S. 1107), modifying a judgment of the Trial Term for plaintiff, defendant appeals, and a stipulation consenting to reduction of judgment was filed.

Judgment affirmed.


[266 N.Y. 244]Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First department.

[266 N.Y. 245]Alfred M. Bailey, of White Plains, for appellant.

G. Everett Hunt, of New York City, for respondent.


[266 N.Y. 246]CRANE, Chief Judge.

On the 18th day of April, 1930, Arthur V. Conklin, then a young man thirty-two years of age, went to the Albany Airport and obtained passage to Newark, N. J. The defendant had a regularly scheduled trip leaving Albany at 2 p. m. The deceased paid for his ticket in cash. Nothing was said to him about flying conditions in and about Newark nor about different priced tickets. The plane ran into a fog at Poughkeepsie, which thickened on the approach to Newark, so that in the attempted landing the plane struck

[194 N.E. 693]

against high-tension electric wires, destroying ship and passengers.

The negligence of the defendant is not disputed upon this appeal; the single point being made that the defendant was relieved from liability in excess of $5,000 for negligence causing young Conklin's death, by reason of the terms and conditions stated upon the ticket which he purchased. Is it the law of this state that a common carrier of passengers for hire can refuse to carry them unless they stipulate or contract that the carrier shall not be liable for its own negligence or that of its employees? This state has never gone that far.

The ticket which Conklin purchased read, in part:

‘This passage ticket is issued by the Company and accepted by the holder hereof on the following conditions: * * *

‘6. That the holder voluntarily assumes the ordinary risks of air transportation, and stipulates that the Company shall not be responsible save for its own neglect of duty, and that the liability of the Company to the holder hereof or his legal representatives in case of accident resulting in death or physical disability, in any event, and under any circumstances, is limited as follows: Class A Contract, (Minimum Rate) Maximum Liability, $5,000.00, Class B Contract, (Double Rate) Maximum Liability, $10,000.00, Class C. Contract, tract, (Triple Rate) Maximum Liability, $15,000.00.

[266 N.Y. 247]‘Company's ticket agents are provided with all three forms of contract. This is a Class ‘A’ Contract. * * *

‘The Holder Hereof Has Read and Accepted The Foregoing Conditions Of Passage.

‘A. V. Conklin,

‘Signature of holder

‘1441 Broadway, N. Y. C.

‘Address.

‘For the Company

‘Truman Sewall

‘General Traffic Manager

‘M. A. Krueger

‘Issuing Agent.’

The carrier did not give to the purchaser the choice of buying a ticket which would allow...

To continue reading

Request your trial
51 practice notes
  • Vanity Fair Mills v. T. Eaton Co., No. 251
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 1 Junio 1956
    ...York. See, e. g., Cuba R. Co. v. Crosby, 1912, 222 U.S. 473, 32 S.Ct. 132, 56 L.Ed. 274; Conklin v. Canadian-Colonial Airways, Inc., 1935, 266 N.Y. 244, 194 N.E. 692. Cf. discussion in Walton v. Arabian American Oil Co., 2 Cir., 1956, 233 F.2d 5 Restatement, Conflict of Laws § 377 (1934). 6......
  • Siegelman v. Cunard White Star, No. 14
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 17 Febrero 1955
    ...Department." 2 There is also the fact that the transportation began in New York. Cf. Conklin v. Canadian-Colonial Airways, Inc., 266 N.Y. 244, 248-249, 194 N.E. 3 See also Illinois Livestock Insurance Co. v. Baker, 153 Ill. 240, 38 N.E. 627; Galloway v. Standard Fire Ins. Co., 45 W. Va. 237......
  • Schultz v. Boy Scouts of America, Inc.
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • 30 Abril 1985
    ...last event necessary to make the actor liable occurred (see, Poplar v. Bourjois, Inc., 298 N.Y. 62; Conklin v. Canadian-Colonial Airways, 266 N.Y. 244, 194 N.E. 692; Hunter v. Derby Foods, 110 F.2d 970 [2d Cir.] ). Thus, the locus in this case is determined by where the plaintiffs' injuries......
  • Donahue v. Warner Bros. Pictures, No. 4208.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit)
    • 16 Febrero 1952
    ...7 Cir., 100 F. 655, 657; Alabama G. S. R. Co. v. Carroll, 97 Ala. 126, 11 So. 803, 805, 806; Conklin v. Canadian-Colonial Airways, Inc., 266 N.Y. 244, 194 N.E. 692, 694; Dallas v. Whitney, 118 W.Va. 106, 188 S.E. 766, 767; Connecticut Valley Lumber Co. v. Maine Cent. R. R., 78 N. H. 553, 10......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
50 cases
  • Vanity Fair Mills v. T. Eaton Co., No. 251
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 1 Junio 1956
    ...York. See, e. g., Cuba R. Co. v. Crosby, 1912, 222 U.S. 473, 32 S.Ct. 132, 56 L.Ed. 274; Conklin v. Canadian-Colonial Airways, Inc., 1935, 266 N.Y. 244, 194 N.E. 692. Cf. discussion in Walton v. Arabian American Oil Co., 2 Cir., 1956, 233 F.2d 5 Restatement, Conflict of Laws § 377 (1934). 6......
  • Siegelman v. Cunard White Star, No. 14
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • 17 Febrero 1955
    ...Department." 2 There is also the fact that the transportation began in New York. Cf. Conklin v. Canadian-Colonial Airways, Inc., 266 N.Y. 244, 248-249, 194 N.E. 3 See also Illinois Livestock Insurance Co. v. Baker, 153 Ill. 240, 38 N.E. 627; Galloway v. Standard Fire Ins. Co., 45 W. Va. 237......
  • Schultz v. Boy Scouts of America, Inc.
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • 30 Abril 1985
    ...last event necessary to make the actor liable occurred (see, Poplar v. Bourjois, Inc., 298 N.Y. 62; Conklin v. Canadian-Colonial Airways, 266 N.Y. 244, 194 N.E. 692; Hunter v. Derby Foods, 110 F.2d 970 [2d Cir.] ). Thus, the locus in this case is determined by where the plaintiffs' injuries......
  • Donahue v. Warner Bros. Pictures, No. 4208.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (10th Circuit)
    • 16 Febrero 1952
    ...7 Cir., 100 F. 655, 657; Alabama G. S. R. Co. v. Carroll, 97 Ala. 126, 11 So. 803, 805, 806; Conklin v. Canadian-Colonial Airways, Inc., 266 N.Y. 244, 194 N.E. 692, 694; Dallas v. Whitney, 118 W.Va. 106, 188 S.E. 766, 767; Connecticut Valley Lumber Co. v. Maine Cent. R. R., 78 N. H. 553, 10......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Houston, we have a (liability) problem.
    • United States
    • Michigan Law Review Vol. 112 Nbr. 5, March - March 2014
    • 1 Marzo 2014
    ...even though there be a contract of carriage by a common carrier." (citations omitted)); Conklin v. Canadian-Colonial Airways, Inc., 194 N.E. 692, 693-94 (N.Y. 1935) (holding that New York law prohibits a common carrier from limiting liability for injury or (56.) See Dressel, 623 P.2d at 377......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT