ANTONE ZETLER, Respondent, v. TONOPAH AND GOLDFIELD RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant
Zetler v. Tonopah & Goldfield Railroad
McCarran, J.: I concur.
ANTONE ZETLER, Respondent, v. TONOPAH AND GOLDFIELD RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant.
[No. 1889]
ANTONE ZETLER, Respondent, v. TONOPAH AND GOLDFIELD RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant.
[143 Pac. 119]
1. Carriers — Transportation of Baggage — Limit of Liability.
A carrier, by reasonable regulations brought to the knowledge of a passenger, may limit its liability as an insurer for the transportation of baggage to a specified value, except when paid additional compensation proportional to the risk, and $100 is a reasonable amount in value above which an additional charge may be made.
2. Carriers — Transportation of Baggage — Limited Liability— Negligent Loss.
A stipulation limiting a carrier’s liability for loss of baggage to $100, in the absence of payment of an excess charge for additional valuation, is unavailable, where the carrier has wilfully taken or withheld the baggage from the passenger, or has negligently delivered it to the wrong person.
Norcross, J., dissenting.
Appeal from the Seventh Judicial District Court, Esmeralda County; Peter J. Somers, Judge.
On rehearing.
Affirmed.
[For former opinion, see 35 Nev. 384.]
Campbell, Metson & Brown, Walter Shelton, and Huger Wilkinson, for Appellant.
James Donovan, for Respondent.
By the Court,
Talbot, C. J.:
After more mature deliberation, we see no reason for changing the conclusion reached in the former opinion (35 Nev. 384, 129 Pac. 299). It may be conceded that carriers of passengers, by reasonable regulations brought to the knowledge of the passenger, may be protected against liability as insurers for baggage, exceeding a specified value, except when paid additional compensation proportional to the risk, and that $100 is a reasonable amount in value above which an additional charge may be made.
Nevertheless, if such a stipulation is made or accepted by the passenger, the company should not be allowed to enforce it, if it has wilfully taken or withheld the baggage, or against such a negligent act as the delivery of the trunk to a person not entitled to receive it because not having the check.
The judgment of the district court will stand affirmed.
McCarran, J.: I concur.