Olsen v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.
| Decision Date | 18 September 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 6691.,6691. |
| Citation | 295 F.2d 358 |
| Parties | R. OLSEN, Appellant, v. RAILWAY EXPRESS AGENCY, INC., Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
Submitted on briefs without oral argument.
Before PICKETT, LEWIS and BREITENSTEIN, Circuit Judges.
This is an action initiated by R. Olsen as plaintiff-owner against the defendant Railway Express Agency, Inc. for damages caused by the Express Agency to three objects of art shipped from New York City to Oklahoma City. The defendant carrier admits liability under 49 U.S.C.A. § 20(11)1 and the sole issue at trial and upon appeal is the determination of the proper measure of damages. The trial court granted judgment for $885, a sum equivalent to the cost of repair, shipping expense to the place of repair and return, plus an allowance for depreciation. The judgment was premised upon expert testimony relative to market value, a factor which plaintiff asserts was erroneous in view of the nature of the damaged property, the circumstances of the shipment and the subjective feelings of the owner, Mr. Olsen.
Plaintiff Olsen is a resident of Oklahoma City. While in New York City in 1958, Olsen purchased a number of objects of art from a dealer for shipment to his Oklahoma home. Among such objects were a Last Supper scene, a Meissen Clock and Base and a Concerto Group for which Olsen paid the respective amounts of $3,500, $1,100 and $1,200. Each was damaged in transit, with the greatest damage occurring to the Last Supper.
The parties are not in dispute as to the nature of the property shipped or as to the extent of the physical damage suffered. The Meissen Clock and Base and the Concerto Group were but slightly damaged and the appellant owner is satisfied with the judgment allowing repair costs and depreciation for those items. The Last Supper portrayal was broken in half, and although capable of being repaired, is subjectively valueless to Mr. Olsen in less than perfect condition. He asserts the value of this item as perfect to be his purchase price, $3,500; the value as damaged to be nil; and he claims damage in the amount of $3,500 for this item.
The Last Supper piece is a porcelain work of art made by Fabris of Milan, Italy. It is admittedly an object of art having an artistic value that varies with the eye of the individual beholders. It is of contemporary manufacture and has no special value from antiquity; it is neither original nor unique art as duplicates exist and can be obtained; it is not of museum quality, a term indicating the highest of quality and value.
To determine, in the language of 49 U.S.C.A. § 20(11), "the full actual loss" occasioned when properties are damaged in transit by a carrier, reference is usually made to the standard of market value of the damaged property at point of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reed v. Aaacon Auto Transport, Inc.
...condition. Gulf, Colo. & S.F. R.R. v. Texas Packing Co., 244 U.S. 31, 37 S.Ct. 487, 61 L.Ed. 970 (1917); Olsen v. Railway Express Agency, 295 F.2d 358, 359 (10th Cir. 1961); Illinois Central R.R. v. Zucchero, 221 F.2d 934, 937 (8th Cir. 1955). The rule that one must mitigate or minimize dam......
-
Fraser-Smith Co. v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific R. Co.
...S. F. Ry., 333 F.2d 705, 708-709 (7 Cir. 1964), cert. denied 379 U.S. 967, 85 S.Ct. 661, 13 L.Ed.2d 560 (1965); Olsen v. Railway Exp. Agency, Inc., 295 F.2d 358 (10 Cir. 1961). See also Sunset Motor Lines, Inc. v. Lu-Tex Packing Co., 256 F.2d 495 (5 Cir. 1958); F. J. McCarty Co. v. Southern......
-
Pizzo v. Bekin Van Lines Co.
...carrier defendants would not have inflicted damages for which Pizzo could recover under the amendment. See Olsen v. Railway Express Agency, Inc., 295 F.2d 358, 359-60 (10th Cir. 1961); cf. Project Hope v. M/V IBN SINA, supra, 250 F.3d at 77; Camar Corp. v. Preston Trucking Co., 221 F.3d 271......
-
Hector Martinez and Co. v. Southern Pac. Transp. Co.
...333 F.2d 705, 708 (7th Cir. 1964), Cert. denied, 379 U.S. 967, 85 S.Ct. 661, 13 L.Ed.2d 560 (1965). Accord, Olsen v. Railway Express Agency, Inc., 295 F.2d 358, 359 (10th Cir. 1961). Cf. Illinois Cent. Ry. v. Crail, 281 U.S. 57, 64-65, 50 S.Ct. 180, 74 L.Ed. 699 (1930) (Cummins Amendment). ......