Foster, Glassel Co. v. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co, 17,067

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
Writing for the CourtBREAUX, C. J.
Citation121 La. 1053,46 So. 1014
PartiesFOSTER, GLASSEL CO. v. KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RY. CO. In re KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RY. CO
Docket Number17,067
Decision Date22 June 1908

46 So. 1014

121 La. 1053

FOSTER, GLASSEL CO.
v.
KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RY.
CO.

In re KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RY. CO

No. 17,067

Supreme Court of Louisiana

June 22, 1908


Certiorari to Court of Appeal, Parish of Caddo.

Action by the Foster, Glassel Company against the Kansas City Southern Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiff was affirmed by the Court of Appeal, and defendant applies for certiorari or writ of review. Reversed.

Alexander & Wilkinson, for applicant.

Hall & Jack, for respondent.

OPINION

BREAUX, C. J.

[121 La. 1054] On Rehearing.

There was no published through rate from the point of shipment and [46 So. 1015] the destination of the freight. There was a published local rate between different places on the way.

The question is whether the carrier had the right to collect rates fixed by the Commission from the one point to the intermediate point and then to Shreveport, although there was no through rate.

The agent at the initial station furnished a lower rate to plaintiffs than the schedule rate.

Plaintiffs charged that the sum of the local rates was excessive.

That was the amount which was collected [121 La. 1055] from the defendant and paid under protest. Plaintiffs sued for the difference in the amount between the amount furnished to them by the agent and the schedule rate, consisting of the sum of the local rates.

We are constrained to arrive at the conclusion that, although there is no through rate, it is not left to the carrier to make rates. The purpose is to avoid difference in rates and discrimination.

It was a mistake on the part of the clerk or agent who furnished to plaintiffs the information which induced them to have their property shipped as stated by them. There were local rates, and they must be taken as governing.

Under the law the railroad "had no option but to collect the charges which they did." See Report and Order of the Commission, No. 1,048.

The following is a brief statement of facts agreed upon between counsel for plaintiffs and counsel for defendants:

"It is further admitted that the rate collected was the sum of the local fixed and published by the Interstate Commission from Stillwater to an intermediate point and from the intermediate point to Shreveport; and that there was no through rate at that time between Stillwater and Shreveport established by the Commission; and the amount sued for is the difference between the rate quoted by defendant's agent and the sum of the local rates fixed by the Commission."

It being admitted that there were published local rates approved by the Commission, it follows that the following is pertinent. One who has obtained from the carrier transportation of goods from one state to another, at a rate specified in the bill of lading less than the published schedule of rate, filed and approved by the Interstate Commerce Commission, and in force at the time, whether or not he knew that the rate obtained was less than the schedule rate, is not entitled to recover the goods or damages for detention upon the tender made of the amount of the [121 La. 1056] charges named in the bill of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • Louisiana Ry. & Navigation Co. v. Holly, 18,420
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Louisiana
    • November 28, 1910
    ...the plaintiff could not claim more than this through rate; second, estoppel. In the case of Foster-Glassel Company v. K. C. S. Ry. Co., 121 La. 1053, 46 So. 1014, there was no through rate; but that circumstance does not affect the principle governing cases of this kind, which is that by th......
  • State v. Thompson, 17,138
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Louisiana
    • June 22, 1908
    ...State. OPINION LAND, J. Defendant convicted of murder, without capital punishment, appeals from a sentence of imprisonment at hard labor [46 So. 1014] for life, and relies for reversal on several bills of exception. 1. The indictment was returned by the grand jury on November 18, 1907, and ......
2 cases
  • Louisiana Ry. & Navigation Co. v. Holly, 18,420
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Louisiana
    • November 28, 1910
    ...the plaintiff could not claim more than this through rate; second, estoppel. In the case of Foster-Glassel Company v. K. C. S. Ry. Co., 121 La. 1053, 46 So. 1014, there was no through rate; but that circumstance does not affect the principle governing cases of this kind, which is that by th......
  • State v. Thompson, 17,138
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Louisiana
    • June 22, 1908
    ...State. OPINION LAND, J. Defendant convicted of murder, without capital punishment, appeals from a sentence of imprisonment at hard labor [46 So. 1014] for life, and relies for reversal on several bills of exception. 1. The indictment was returned by the grand jury on November 18, 1907, and ......

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