Atchison, Topeka Santa Fe Railway Company v. Robinson

Decision Date06 April 1914
Docket NumberNo. 450,450
Citation58 L.Ed. 901,34 S.Ct. 556,233 U.S. 173
PartiesATCHISON, TOPEKA, & SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY, Plff. in Err., v. C. E. ROBINSON
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

Messrs. S. T. Bledsoe, J. R. Cottingham, and George M. Green for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. John B. Daish, H. H. Smith, and J. W. Beller for defendant in error.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 174-176 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice Day delivered the opinion of the court:

The defendant in error, plaintiff below, and herein so designated, brought suit in the district court of Lincoln county, Oklahoma, to recover for damages to a race horse, the property of the plaintiff, which was shipped with other race horses from Kansas City, Missouri, to Lawrence, Kansas. Upon verdict in favor of the plaintiff, judgment was entered accordingly, which was affirmed by the supreme court of Oklahoma (36 Okla. 435, 129 Pac. 20).

The plaintiff alleged that the contract of consignment was a verbal one, made by calling up the agent of the railway company at Kansas City by telephone on the day the shipment was made, advising him that the plaintiff had race horses which he desired to ship to Lawrence in time for the races next day; that he was informed by the agent that such shipment could be made, and that if the horses could be loaded between 4 and 6 o'clock of that afternoon they would be carried by the fast freight known as the 'Red Ball,' making no stops for local freight, and reaching Lawrence about 12 o'clock that night; that it was agreed between them that the shipment should be made by that train; that the plaintiff was instructed where to bring the horses, and informed that a car would be placed to receive them; and that the horses were taken to the place designated by the agent, loaded into a car between 5 and 6 o'clock in the afternoon, the car being closed and labeled 'Red Ball,' meaning that it should go with the 'Red Ball' train on that evening. The car was not taken out that night, and there was testimony tending to show that it was switched about in the yard and on the next morning was started with local freight to Lawrence, arriving there about 2 o'clock next day, too late for the races. And there was evidence that the horse of the plaintiff had been badly injured through the negligence of the defendant.

By an amended answer the railway company set up the fact that the shipment was in interstate commerce, and the filing and approval by the Interstate Commerce Commission of certain tariff rates duly posted, as required by the act, wherein it was provided:

'(A) Rates named in § 2 apply on shipments of ordinary live stock, where contracts are executed by shippers on blanks furnished by these companies, and are based on the declared valuation by the shipper at time contract is signed, not to exceed the following:

'Each horse or pony (gelding, mare, stallion), mule or jack, $100. Each ox, bull, or steer, $50. Each cow, $30. Each calf, $10. Each hog, $10. Each sheep or goat, $3.

'(B) Where the declared value exceeds the above, an addition of 25 per cent will be added to the rate for each 100 per cent or fractional part thereof of additional declared valuation per head. Animals exceeding in value 800 per head will be taken only by special arrangement.

'(C) Table of rates named will be charged on shipments of live stock made with limitation of company's liability at common law, and under this status shippers will have the choice of executing or accepting contracts for shipments of live stock with or without limitation of liability and rates accordingly;' and alleged that the shipper obtained the benefit of the reduced rate applicable to the value fixed in the written contract governing the shipment of horses; that the shipment was made under the tariffs so filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission, and that the rates and liability of the company were governed by the act of Congress. The plaintiff contended that the complete contract was made in the oral arrangement without reference to or mention of any particular rate or the value of the stock other than that it was a race horse. Taking the most favorable view of the testimony for the plaintiff, it tended to show that after the car had started from the place of loading, an agent of the company presented to the plaintiff a printed contract made in conformity to the schedules filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission, but without calling his attention to its provisions, without informing him of its contents, and without procuring his assent to the terms therein stated, although he admitted executing the contract.

The trial court charged the jury over the exception of the railway company that if they found that at the time of the shipment the contract was entered into by the plaintiff and the defendant, and that the plaintiff represented to the defendant that the horse did not exceed $100 in value, and that the defendant relied upon the representation, and gave a rate less than the regular one for that class of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
214 cases
  • P.T. & L. Const. Co., Inc. v. State of N.J., Dept. of Transp.
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • October 19, 1987
    ... ... P.T. & L. CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff-Respondent ... and ... ...
  • Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Blind
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • May 26, 1914
    ...Ct. 383, 58 L. Ed. -;Missouri etc., Co. v. Harriman (1913) 227 U. S. 657, 33 Sup. Ct. 397, 57 L. Ed. 690;Atchison, etc., Co. v. Robinson (1913) 233 U. S. 173, 34 Sup. Ct. 556, 58 L. Ed. -;Boston, etc., Co. v. Hooker (1913) 233 U. S. 97, 34 Sup. Ct. 526, 58 L. Ed. -; Kansas City, etc., Co. v......
  • Donovan v. Sells Fargo & Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • June 1, 1915
    ...Adams Express Co. v. Croninger, 226 U. S. 491, 33 Sup. Ct. 148, 57 L. Ed. 314, 44 L. R. A. (N. S.) 257; Atchison, etc., Ry. Co. v. Robinson, 233 U. S. 173, 34 Sup. Ct. 556, 58 L. Ed. 901; Missouri, Kansas & Texas Ry. Co. v. Harriman, 227 U. S. 657, 33 Sup. Ct. 397, 57 L. Ed. 690; Great Nort......
  • Clark v. Southern Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • May 16, 1918
    ...purpose to exercise its conceded authority, the regulating power of the state ceased to exist.” See also, Atchison, etc., Co. v. Robinson, 233 U. S. 173, 34 Sup. Ct. 556, 58 L. Ed. 901, and also the following, involving the carriage of personal baggage: Boston, etc., Co. v. Hooker, 233 U. S......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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