Nenno v. St. Louis & S. F. R. Co.

• Decision Date: 29 March 1904
• Citation: 80 S.W. 24,105 Mo. App. 540
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
• Parties: NENNO v. ST. LOUIS & S. F. R. CO. et al.

80 S.W. 24

105 Mo. App. 540

NENNO v. ST. LOUIS & S. F. R. CO. et al.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

March 29, 1904.

CONNECTING CARRIERS—LIMITATION OF LIABILITY—BILL OF LADING—CONSTRUCTION—WHAT LAW GOVERNS —PRESUMPTIONS—STATUTES—PROOF—JUSTICES OF THE PEACE—STATEMENTS —JUDGMENTS—VALIDITY—APPEAL.

1. A contract made in Illinois for the shipment of freight from that state to a point in Missouri will be construed according to the laws of Illinois.

2. Where a bill of lading stated that the initial carrier had received the goods to be transported and delivered to the succeeding carrier, to be forwarded to destination, it being expressly agreed that the initial carrier's responsibility ceased on the arrival of the goods at its terminal depot, where they were to be delivered to the connecting carrier, such contract, in the absence of statute, limited the initial carrier's liability to loss accruing on its own line, though the blank in the bill for the insertion of the connecting point was not properly filled.

3. A statute of a foreign state cannot be considered in construing a contract made in such state, unless proved.

4. It cannot be presumed that a state where a contract was made has enacted statutes identical or similar to statutes existing in the state where the action is brought, with reference to such contracts.

5. Where, after suit brought to recover for goods lost in transportation, the initial carrier and a connecting carrier were summoned, on plaintiff's motion, to defend, and there was no statement whatever filed with the justice against such carriers, the statement originally filed could not be amended on appeal to the circuit court so as to sustain a judgment against them.

6. In the absence of a statement of a cause of action filed before a justice in an action against certain connecting carriers, his judgment against them was an absolute nullity, and was therefore insufficient to confer jurisdiction on the circuit court by appeal.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Daniel G. Taylor; Judge.

Action by M. B. Nenno against the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company and another. From a judgment against the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Company alone, on appeal from a justice's judgment against the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company, the Terminal Railroad Association, and the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Company, the latter appeals. Reversed.

W. F. Evans and W. G. Schofield, for appellant. Jacob Oppenheimer, for respondent.

Statement.

REYBURN, J.

This proceeding was commenced before a justice of the peace of the city of St. Louis by lodging the following complaint: "M. B. Nenno, Plaintiff, v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company, a Corporation, and Chicago, Peoria & St. Louis Railroad Company, a Corporation, Defendants. Plaintiff, for his cause of action against the defendants, alleges that on or about the 8th day of November, 1901, he delivered to the Chicago, Peoria & St. Louis Railroad Company certain household goods to be shipped from Joliet, Illinois, to Crocker, Missouri; that at the time of the arrival of said household goods a number of articles had been taken from the car, a list of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof; that plaintiff paid the regular charges demanded by said defendants for the safe transportation of said goods. Wherefore," etc. Preceding trial the justice dismissed the action as to the Chicago, Peoria & St. Louis Railroad Company, and upon the following application: "Comes now the plaintiff in the above-entitled cause, and moves the court to make the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Company, a corporation, and the Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis, a corporation, parties defendant in the above cause, and to issue summons against said parties, for the reason that they should be brought into court as defendants in said cause for the proper determination of the plaintiff's rights"—issued writs for the corporations thus made defendants, which were served, and September 13, 1902, the cause was tried by the justice, and judgment rendered against the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Company, the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company, and the Terminal Railroad Association, which defendants jointly appealed to the circuit court. When the case was called for trial anew, appellant objected to introduction of any evidence, assigning that the statement filed before the justice did not state any fact upon which a judgment could be based against it, whereupon plaintiff was permitted to amend by striking out the words "Chicago, Peoria & St. Louis Railroad Company," and interlineation of the words "Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Company," and "through the carelessness and negligence of defendants," so that the amended statement thus appeared: "M. B. Nenno, Plaintiff, v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company, a Corporation, and Chicago, Peoria & St. Louis Railroad Company, a Corporation, Defendants. Plaintiff, for his cause of action against the defendants, alleges that on or about the 8th day of November, 1902, he delivered to the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Company, Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis, and St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company certain household goods, to be shipped from Joliet, Illinois, to Crocker, Missouri; that at the time of the arrival of said household goods a number of articles had been taken from the car through the carelessness and negligence of defendants, a list of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof; that plaintiff paid the regular charges demanded by said defendants for the safe transportation of said goods. Wherefore," etc. The case progressed before the court as a jury, and plaintiff established delivery of household goods to the Rock Island corporation at Joliet, Ill., November 8, 1901, for shipment to Crocker, Mo., evidenced by bill of lading embracing among other terms the following: "Received from M. B. Nenno in apparent good order, by the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company the following described packages marked and numbered as per margin, subject to the conditions and regulations of the published Tariff of said Company, to be transported over the line of this railroad to (Peoria) and delivered, after the payment of freight, in like good order to the next carrier (if the same are to be forwarded beyond the line of this Company's road) to be carried to the place of destination; it being expressly agreed that the responsibility of this Company shall cease at this Company's depot at which the same are to be delivered to such carrier." At terminus of the Rock Island line, the city of Peoria, Ill., the shipment was delivered to the Chicago, Peoria & St. Louis Railroad Company, and by it transferred at East St. Louis to the Terminal Railroad Association, which in turn made delivery to the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company to complete transportation to its destination. The testimony failed to show any injury or damage while in possession of appellant, but established the safe delivery of the property at Peoria to the connecting carrier. From judgment in favor of its codefendants and against it, the Rock Island Company has appealed.

The trial court, refusing declarations of law asked by appellant, that no recovery could be had against it, and that the original statement filed failed to state facts sufficient to entitle plaintiff to recover against it, and the amended statement constituted a departure, gave the following: "The court declares the law to be that, under the bill of lading or contract sued upon in this action, the defendant Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Company was charged with the duty of transporting the goods of plaintiff mentioned in the bill of lading from Joliet, Illinois, to Crocker, Missouri, and if the court, sitting as a...