Garner v. St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 18 June 1906
• Citation: 96 S.W. 187
• Parties: GARNER et al. v. ST. LOUIS, I. M. & S. RY. CO.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

96 S.W. 187

GARNER et al. v. ST. LOUIS, I. M. & S. RY. CO.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

June 18, 1906.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Johnson County; William L. Moose, Judge.

Action by R. C. Garner and another against the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company. From a judgment in favor of defendant, plaintiffs appeal. Reversed and remanded.

The evidence, in addition to that disclosed by the opinion, is as follows: J. W. Robinson testified that he was night watchman on defendant's platform and frequently assisted defendant's agent in making out bills of lading, having previously done so for plaintiffs; that he received from plaintiffs instructions to ship their cotton to the cotton company, which he hung on a hook in the depot office; that at plaintiffs' request he engaged Fred Mohon to put the cotton on the platform; that he informed the agent of the shipping instructions, pointing it out to him, who said something as to checking. Fred Mohon testified that at the instance of Robinson he put plaintiffs' cotton on the platform and informed the agent thereof, and that the agent checked such cotton and issued a bill of lading for certain other cotton. J. S. Garner, one of the plaintiffs, testified he mailed a list of the cotton to Robinson as he had before done, the custom being for Robinson to put the cotton on the platform and get the bill of lading. The cotton was sold f. o. b. platform, plaintiffs to put the cotton on platform, get a bill of lading, afterwards issuing draft and attaching it to such bill; that he understood the delivery to the railway company to be complete when the cotton was placed on the platform with shipping instructions, but that as to the purchaser plaintiffs were to get a bill of lading for the cotton; that he understood Mr. Robinson was not acting agent of the railroad; and that he was not, to his knowledge, employed to do anything except watch, though he did a good deal of the agent's work.

Cravens & Covington, for appellants.

HILL, C. J. (after stating the facts).

The Garners were merchants at Lamar and contracted to sell Lesser Cotton Company 100 bales of cotton at 7½ cents f. o. b. the railroad platform. When delivered to the railroad a bill of lading was issued, and Garner would attach it to a draft drawn on Lesser Cotton Company and collect the draft at his bank. The details of the sale are not otherwise important. The Garners had 8 bales of cotton at Knoxville and directed it shipped. It was delivered upon the railway platform, the numbers checked by the agent preparatory to issuing a bill of lading, and shipping instructions were delivered to the agent. The night of the day when the cotton was put on the platform the station burned, and this cotton was destroyed. The Garners sued the railroad company for its value, and the court directed a verdict for the railroad company, and the Garners have appealed. The reporter will set forth a summary of the evidence in the statement of facts.

A carrier's liability begins when it receives freight for immediate shipment, and is not dependent upon the issuance of a bill of lading. Railway v. Neel, 56 Ark. 279, 19 S. W. 963; Railway v. Murphy, 60 Ark. 333, 30 S. W. 419, 46 Am. St. Rep. 202; Railway v. Hunter, 42 Ark. 200. There was ample evidence to go to the jury on the contention that the cotton was received for immediate shipment, although a bill of lading had not been issued. Appellee's counsel has not favored the court with a brief, but appellant's counsel...