
    FELD v. PLATT.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    November 29, 1907.)
    Carriers—Loss of Goods—Instructions.
    Where, in an ordinary1 baggage case, there was no affirmative proof that plaintiff’s agent, to whom the carrier’s receipt was delivered, was ignorant of its contents, the refusal to charge that the burden was on plaintiff to establish such ignorance was reversible error.
    Appeal from City Court of New York, Trial Term.
    Action by Simon Feld against Edward T. Platt, as treasurer, etc., of the United States Express Company. From a judgment for plaintiff for $531.64, and from an order denying a motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial, and to reduce the verdict to $50, defendant appeals. Reversed, and new trial ordered.
    Argued before GILDERSLEEVE, P. J., and EEVENTRITT and ERLANGER, JJ.
    O’Brien, Boardman, Platt & Dunning (George W. Field and Russell H. Robbins, of counsel), for appellant.
    Leidy & Goodstein (Herman B. Goodstein, of counsel), for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

This is the ordinary “baggage case.” There was no affirmative proof that the plaintiff’s agent, to whom the receipt was delivered, was ignorant of its contents. Therefore the request to charge that the burden was on the plaintiff to establish such ignorance was proper, and its refusal error.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.  