Kanawha Black Band Coal Co. v. Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 07 May 1929 |
| Docket Number | 6431. |
| Parties | KANAWHA BLACK BAND COAL CO. et al. v. CHESAPEAKE & O. RY. CO. et al. |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
Submitted April 10, 1929.
Rehearing Denied. July 17, 1929.
Syllabus by the Court.
The provision of subsection 2, § 16, of The Interstate Commerce Act (U.S.C. Title 49, chapter 1 [49 USCA § § 1-27]) providing that in suits for reparation based on findings of The Interstate Commerce Commission such "findings and order of the Commission shall be prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated," cuts off no defense and interposes no obstacle to a full contestation of the issues and takes no question of fact from either court or jury. At most, it is merely a rule of evidence.
Where a combination of rates in interstate commerce is excessive because connecting carriers participating in the traffic make unreasonable and unlawful exactions of the complainants, such participating carriers are jointly and severally liable to complainants for the damages caused them by such excessive rates.
A case wherein the trial court, in lieu of a jury, properly rendered judgment jointly and severally against carriers, making unreasonable and unlawful exactions of certain shippers of coal.
Error to Circuit Court, Kanawha County.
Action by the Kanawha Black Band Coal Company and another against the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company and others. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant named brings error. Affirmed.
D. H Leake, of Richmond, and C. W. Strickling and Fitzpatrick Brown & Davis, all of Huntington, for plaintiff in error.
Lilly & Lilly, of Charleston, for defendants in error.
The Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company prosecutes this writ of error to a judgment of the circuit court of Kanawha county in favor of Kanawha Black Band Coal Company and Glenn Coal Company against Kanawha Central Railway Company and Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, predicated upon a reparation order of The Interstate Commerce Commission. The case was tried before the court in lieu of a jury.
The two coal companies are producers of coal on the line of railway of the Kanawha Central Railway Company, whose road is five miles in length, located wholly within this state, and connects with the line of the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company at Brounland. On the 25th day of January, 1922, the said two coal companies, together with other complainants, filed their complaint before The Interstate Commerce Commission, docket No. 13546, against the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company, the Kanawha Central Railway Company, and numerous other railway companies, alleging that the rates on bituminous coal shipped in carload lots from the mines on the Kanawha Central in interstate commerce were unreasonable, and prayed that an investigation be made and that there be prescribed for coal originating on the Kanawha Central a joint through rate not greater than the existing rate from stations in the Kanawha district on the line of the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway and its branch lines to the same destinations. At that time, the Kanawha Central had not filed a schedule of rates with The Interstate Commerce Commission, but, pursuant to authorization of the West Virginia Public Service Commission, was charging $8.50 per car for coal originating on its line and delivered by it to the Chesapeake & Ohio at Brounland. After the filing of the petition aforesaid, the Kanawha Central filed with The Interstate Commerce Commission a tariff effective June 23, 1922, naming a proportional interstate rate of 40 cents per long ton on coal from mines on its line to Brounland. Both the said two coal companies and the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company promptly protested against said rate, but The Interstate Commerce Commission overruled the protests, and permitted the said new rate to remain in effect pending the hearing of the case then before it. The charge or rate of the Kanawha Central Railway Company of $8.50 per car, and later, of 40 cents per gross ton, for transportation of coal from the mines to Brounland, was not participated in by the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company. This charge was paid by the coal companies to the Kanawha Central and retained by it. Nor did the Kanawha Central participate in the Kanawha district rate which was applied by the Chesapeake & Ohio to the tonnage from Brounland to destination. On the 30th day of March, 1923, The Interstate Commerce Commission made its finding "that the combination rates in effect on coal from mines on the Kanawha Central to interstate destinations on the lines of the defendants, other than the Kanawha Central, are, and for the future will be, unreasonable and unduly prejudicial to the extent that they exceed or may exceed the group rate contemporaneously maintained on like traffic from other mines in the Kanawha District served by the Chesapeake & Ohio to the same destinations." By order entered contemporaneously, the commission required that the railroad companies "cease and desist, on or before July 13, 1923, and thereafter to abstain, from publishing, demanding or collecting for the transportation of coal, in carloads, from mines on the Kanawha Central Railway to interstate destinations on the lines of said defendants other than the Kanawha Central Railway, rates which exceed those prescribed" by the commission. The opinion of the commission is reported in Kanawha Black Band Coal Co. v. Chesapeake & O. R. Co., 78 I. C. C. at page 429.
In June, 1924, the said two coal companies filed a further complaint against the transportation companies, docket No. 16160, before The Interstate Commerce Commission, claiming reparation for the period elapsing between June 23, 1922, and July 13, 1923, to the extent that the transportation charges they were required to pay exceeded the district rate plus $8.50 per car. It was alleged that the excessive charge amounted to about 23 cents per gross ton. On the 16th day of April, 1925, The Interstate Commerce Commission rendered an opinion (Kanawha Black Band Coal Co. v. Kanawha Cent. R. Co., 98 I. C. C. 431) sustaining the contention of the complainants and declaring "that the through rates on coal, in carloads, from complainants' mines on the Kanawha Central to interstate destinations on the lines of the other defendants between June 24, 1922, and July 13, 1923, were unreasonable to the extent that they exceeded the district rates contemporaneously applicable from Brounland to the same destinations plus $8.50 per car." The commission required further proof to be furnished by the petitioners as to the respective amounts of coal shipped by them during the period of time above mentioned. Upon the incoming of the further proof as required, the commission ascertained the tonnage that had been shipped by the petitioners, respectively, during said period, and entered an order December 2, 1927, directing and requiring the Kanawha Central Railway Company and the Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Company to pay to Kanawha Black Band Coal Company the sum of $3,728.74 with interest from March 1, 1923, and to Glenn Coal Company, the sum of $5,775.73 with interest from said date, both requirements being "as reparation on account of unreasonable rates-charged for the transportation of numerous carloads of coal from mines on the Kanawha Central Railway to interstate destinations." The railway companies having declined to discharge said reparation requirement, this suit followed, with the result hereinabove first noted.
By a supplemental order of June 8, 1928, induced by cross-petition of Kanawha Central respecting equitable division for the Kanawha Central out of the Kanawha District rate, which rate, under order of the commission, had been made effective July 13, 1923, as to interstate shipments originating on the Kanawha Central, the commission found that of such joint through rate the Kanawha Central should receive 29 cents per long ton.
Subsection 2 of section 16 of The Interstate Commerce Act (U.S.C. Title 49, chapter 1 [49 USCA § § 1-27]), authorizes suits of this sort in either the state or federal courts on reparation orders of The Interstate Commerce Commission, and provides that such suit "shall proceed in all respects like other civil suits for damages, except that on the trial of such suit the findings and order of the Commission shall be prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. ***" (49 USCA § 16(2). Subsection 4 of said paragraph permits all parties in whose favor the commission may have made an award for damages by single order to be joined as plaintiffs, and all of the carriers parties to such order awarding such damages to be joined as defendants, and authorizes such suit to be maintained by such joint plaintiffs against such joint defendants.
Prior to its promulgation of the 40 cent rate, June 23, 1922, as already noted, the Kanawha Central had established no tariff for interstate shipments, nor had any rate been fixed for it by The Interstate Commerce Commission; nor had there been established by agreement of the carriers or by order of the commission a joint interstate rate for the Kanawha Central and other roads for tonnage originating on the Kanawha Central.
It is urged by defendants in error that the finding of The Interstate Commerce Commission fixing reparation against both the Kanawha Central and the Chesapeake & Ohio in favor of the defendants in error is prima facie correct, and that in this court, just as in the trial court, full force should be given to the reparation order of the commission. We, of course recognize that findings of The Interstate Commerce Commission on matters of rate are entitled to great weight and most careful consideration in all other tribunals, but we do not understand that in matters...
To continue reading
Request your trial