Knight v. Carolina Coach Co, 253.

• Decision Date: 02 July 1931
• Docket Number: No. 253.,253.
• Citation: 159 S.E. 311
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: KNIGHT. v. CAROLINA COACH CO.

(201 N.C. 261)

159 S.E. 311

KNIGHT.

v.CAROLINA COACH CO.

No. 253.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 2, 1931.

Appeal from Superior Court, Wake County; Clayton Moore, Special Judge.

Action by R. A. Knight against the Carolina Coach Company. From the judgment rendered, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

On or about April 10, 1930, the plaintiff purchased a ticket from the defendant at Rocky Mount for transportation over its line to Durham, and delivered to the defendant his traveling bag, containing personal effects. The defendant accepted the traveling bag and checked the same, giving to plaintiff a claim check. The claim check provided: "Baggage liability limited to $50.00 unless higher valuation declared and shown on this check and extra charge paid as provided by tariff regulations filed with and approved by the Corporation Commission."

The bag and its contents were lost by the defendant during transit, and the plaintiff instituted this action for damages in the sum of $158.50, alleging that such sum was the fair value of the bag and its contents.

The defendant filed an answer alleging that it had offered to pay plaintiff $50, in accordance with the terms of the baggage check. The defendant further alleged that it operated under and by virtue of chapter 136, Public Laws of 1927, and in accordance with rules and regulations prescribed by the Corporation Commission, and that pursuant to such rules it had adopted a ticket limiting liability for damage to $50 "unless higher valuation declared, " etc., and that it had adopted a baggage check or claim check pursuant to the laws of the state and the regulations imposed by the Corporation Commission. Defendant further alleged that, under the regulations of the Corporation Commission, it was required to carry insurance insuring the baggage of passengers to the amount of $50 only, such policies being filed with the Corporation Commission.

Issues were submitted to the jury, and the value of the baggage was found to be $148. It was agreed that the trial judge should answer the issues in accordance with the contentions of the parties, and to find the facts. The facts are set out at length in the judgment, and it is not deemed necessary to set out the entire judgment.

Rule 65, duly adopted by the Corporation Commission, is as follows: "Subject to the limitations in Rule 53 and the conditions of Rules 62 and 64, three pieces of hand baggage, not to exceed a total weight of one hundred pounds nor exceeding fifty ($50.00) dollars in value, shall be checked and carried free of charge for each adult passenger, " etc.

Upon the facts found, the trial judge was of the opinion that the $50 limitation, set out in the ticket and baggage check, was binding and valid. Whereupon, it was adjudged that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the sum of $50, together with the costs of the action.

R. O. Everett, of Durham, and Bart M. Gatling, of Raleigh, for appellant.

Smith & Joyner, of Raleigh, for appellee.

BROGDEN, J.

This court, in Cooper v. R. R., 161 N. C. 400, 77 S. E. 339, announced the policy of the law in this state to be, that common carriers in intrastate shipments could not make a valid contract limiting liability for negligence resulting in loss or damage to the baggage of a passenger. In that case baggage liability was limited to $100 "unless a greater value has been declared by the owner and excess charges paid thereon at the time of taking passage."

The question of law is, Whether chapter 136, Public Laws of 1927, takes a bus company out of the operation of the rule declared in the...