Collins & G. R. Co v. Beasley, (No. 17383.)

• Decision Date: 20 December 1926
• Docket Number: (No. 17383.)
• Citation: Collins & G. R. Co v. Beasley, 136 S.E. 167, 36 Ga.App. 241 (Ga. App. 1926)
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
• Parties: COLLINS & G. R. CO. v. BEASLEY.

36 Ga.App. 241

136 S.E. 167

COLLINS & G. R. CO.

v.BEASLEY.

(No. 17383.)

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No, 2.

Dec. 20, 1926.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

In this action against a carrier to recover for damage to property, alleged to have been done in transit, the evidence authorized the inference that the damage was sustained en route, and from a cause for which the carrier was responsible.

There was some evidence of what would have been the value of the goods at the destination had they arrived in good condition, and of what was their value in their damaged condition.

The amount of the verdict was not in excess of the damages proved by the evidence. The court did not err in refusing the defendant's motion for a new trial.

(Additional Syllabus by Editorial Staff.)

Error from City Court of Reidsville; W. H. Lanier, Judge.

Action by F. L. Beasley against the Collins & Glennville Railroad Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and to review denial of new trial defendant brings error. Affirmed.

Lawton & Cunningham, of Savannah, for plaintiff in error.

H. C. Beasley, of Reidsville, for defendant in error.

BELL, J. This was an action by F. L. Beasley against Collins & Glennville Railroad Company, the initial carrier, for damage to a carload of sweet potatoes shipped by Beasley from Glennville, Ga., to D. Canale & Co., Inc., at Memphis, Tenn. The petition alleged that the weight of the potatoes was 33, 000 pounds, and that their value was $666.60; that when the potatoes arrived at destination they had been damaged by freezing; that they were sold for $202.40, just enough to pay the freight and brokerage charges, and therefore that the plaintiff received nothing from the shipment. The bill of lading specified that the vents of the car in which the potatoes were shipped were open at the time, but were to be closed in case of freezing temperature. The allegation was that the potatoes were damaged by the negligence of the railroad company in failing to close the vents as required by the bill of lading. The prayer was to recover $666.60. The jury found for the plaintiff $533.28. The defendant excepts to the refusal of its motion for a new trial.

The motion for a new trial contained only the usual general grounds and one special ground making a contention which had previously been made in a motion for nonsuit. Counsel for the plaintiff in error seek reversal of the judgment refusing a new trial upon only three grounds, to which we will refer in the opinion below.

1. The first contention of the plaintiff in error is that the evidence showed without dispute that the potatoes could not have been frozen in transit. Evidence was introduced to show that the potatoes were examined at the various points along the route several times during each day from the time of their departure from Glennville until their arrival at their destination and tender to the consignee, and that at no time during this period were they exposed to freezing temperature. However, G. W. Glass, of a firm of brokers in Memphis, who examined the potatoes upon their arrival at Memphis, testified:

"I first saw the shipment on December 15th and examined it on that date, when practically all of the potatoes were frozen. The freezing was uniform throughout the car; the potatoes [were] frozen at the sides of the car and at the ends. I do not know whether they were frozen in transit or before they were shipped; however, they were frozen when they arrived in Memphis; * * * when we examined them on arrival they were frozen. The vents were not closed on arrival, nor were the ventilator doors." "If the vents had been closed it is not likely that the shipment would have been frozen when it reached Memphis." "I have been in the produce business twenty-five years, handling sweet potatoes."

The plaintiff testified that the potatoes were delivered to the carrier at Glennville in good condition. The shipment was on the road about 5 days.

It will be seen from the above that the evidence was in conflict as to whether the potatoes were frozen while in the charge of the carrier. The jury were authorized to find against the carrier upon this issue, and also upon the issue as to whether the damage to the potatoes was due to the failure of the carrier to close the vents as required by the bill of lading.

2. Counsel contend that the verdict is unsupported because, as they insist, there was no evidence of what would have been the market value of the potatoes at the destination had they arrived in good condition, nor of their market value in their actual damaged condition. The plaintiff testifiedthat he had sold the potatoes to D. Canale & Co. for $660.60, f. o. b. Glennville, Ga., the consignee to pay freight and other charges. The consignee refused the potatoes because of their damaged condition, and they were resold in Memphis to the highest bidder, for $202.40.

As a general rule, the selling price of an article, though relevant upon the question, is not, when standing alone, sufficient to establish market value. Watson v. Lough-ran, 112 Ga. 837 (3), 38 S. E. 82; Lott v. Banks, 21 Ga. App. 246 (4), 94 S. E. 322; Allen v. Harris, 113 Ga. 107 (4), 38 S. E. 322; Southern R. Co. v. Williams, 113 Ga. 335 (1), 38 S. E. 744. The invoice price of the potatoes in question was shown by the plaintiff to be $666.60, f. o. b. Glennville. This fact, with the other facts in evidence, was sufficient to authorize the jury to determine the market value of the potatoes at Memphis at the termination of the shipment.

This court will take judicial cognizance that sweet potatoes are a staple food...