Norfolk & Western Ry. Co. v. Ft. Dearborn Coal & Export Co., 2104.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
Citation292 F. 78
Decision Date03 July 1923
Docket Number2104.
PartiesNORFOLK & WESTERN RY. CO. v. FT. DEARBORN COAL & EXPORT CO.

292 F. 78

NORFOLK & WESTERN RY. CO.
v.
FT. DEARBORN COAL & EXPORT CO.

No. 2104.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

July 3, 1923


[292 F. 79]

John H. Holt, of Huntington, W.Va. (Theodore W. Reath and F. Markoe Rivinus, both of Philadelphia, Pa., Waller R. Staples, of Roanoke, Va., and Holt, Duncan & Holt, of Huntington, Va., on the brief), for plaintiff in error.

George S. Couch, of Charleston, W.Va. (Harold A. Ritz and Brown, Jackson & Knight, all of Charleston, W. Va., on the brief), for defendant in error.

Before WOODS and WADDILL, Circuit Judges, and GRONER, District Judge.

GRONER, District Judge.

This case is now before this court a second time. See 280 F. 264. The action was begun by the Coal Company to recover from the Railway Company the value of 897 tons of coal confiscated by the Railway Company at Bluefield, W. Va., in the months of July and August, 1920, while en route, over the lines of the Railway Company, to Lamberts Point, Hampton Roads, Va. We reversed on the former hearing because of the conclusion of the lower court that the plaintiff was entitled to a verdict for the cost price of the coal to it, without evidence of the market value of the same, and we there held the proper measure of damages, on the record as then before us, to be the value of the credit in the pool to which the coal was consigned.

On the second trial the plaintiff, in addition to proving the price paid by it for the coal, proved its market value, as of the date of the taking, in the pool at Lamberts Point, as well as its market value in the Kanawha coal fields in West Virginia, where it was loaded in the cars. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for the sum of $17,366.98, the cost price of the coal, with interest thereon from the date of confiscation, and on this verdict judgment was duly entered. [292 F. 80]

The assignments of error on behalf of the Railway Company relate, first, to the refusal of the District Court to allow the defendant to read to the jury the deposition of one J.D.A. Morrow, vice president of the National Coal Association; second, to the action of the court in refusing to permit the defendant to read to the jury certain statistical tables relating to coal prices shown in the report of the committee on manufactures of the United States Senate, Sixty-Sixth Congress; and, third, the refusal of the court to grant certain instructions asked for by the defendant, and the granting of certain other instructions asked for by the plaintiff, and certain other specific objections to the charge of the court as given.

We will dispose of these assignments in the order in which they are stated above. Morrow was vice president of the National Coal Association, an organization composed of operators, or producers of bituminous coal, in the states of Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky, with a membership of more than 2,000. The members of the association reported to him the cost of producing bituminous coal and the sales value thereof realized by them on board cars at the mines. From these reports he made up a tabulated statement covering the period from January 1 to October...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • Glickfeld v. Howard Van Lines, No. 13763.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • June 11, 1954
    ...Van Dyke v. Penna R. Co., Del.Super., 1952, 86 A.2d 346. See, also, Norfolk & W. Ry. Co. v. Fort Dearborn Coal & Export Co., 4 Cir., 1923, 292 F. 78. 16 17 Ibid. --------...
  • Frank Bowman Co. v. Lecato, 2100.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • July 3, 1923
    ...If this were the rule, the contract would never be completed in cases where by changes in the market or other events occurring subsequent [292 F. 78.] to the written negotiations it became the interest of party to adopt that course in order to escape and evade obligations incurred in the or......
2 cases
  • Glickfeld v. Howard Van Lines, No. 13763.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • June 11, 1954
    ...v. Penna R. Co., Del.Super., 1952, 86 A.2d 346. See, also, Norfolk & W. Ry. Co. v. Fort Dearborn Coal & Export Co., 4 Cir., 1923, 292 F. 78. 16 17 Ibid. --------...
  • Frank Bowman Co. v. Lecato, 2100.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • July 3, 1923
    ...If this were the rule, the contract would never be completed in cases where by changes in the market or other events occurring subsequent [292 F. 78.] to the written negotiations it became the interest of party to adopt that course in order to escape and evade obligations incurred in the or......

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