Pine Tree Lumber Co. v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co

Decision Date26 April 1909
Docket Number17,561
PartiesPINE TREE LUMBER CO. v. CHICAGO, R. I. & P. RY. CO
CourtLouisiana Supreme Court

Case Certified from Court of Appeal, Parish of Lincoln.

Action by the Pine Tree Lumber Company against the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company. Case certified from the Court of Appeal for instructions. Instructions given.

Price Roberts & Warren, for plaintiff.

Barksdale & Barksdale, for defendant.

OPINION

MONROE J.

Statement of the Case.

The judges of the Court of Appeal for the Second circuit certify to this court for decision the question whether the courts of the state have jurisdiction of the action set forth in plaintiff's petition. The petition referred to reads, in part, as follows:

"To the Honorable the Judge of the Fourth District Court, in and for Lincoln Parish, Louisiana:

"The petition of Pine Tree Lumber Company, Limited, * * *, with respect shows: That on the 7th day of December, 1905, it delivered to the Arkansas Southern Railroad Company, * * * at its Winona station, La., a certain car load of dressed lumber, weighing 47,700 lbs., for transportation to Hanna, I T.; that, on the application of petitioner for a car, said railway company furnished Mo. P. car No. 31,459 for the transportation of said lumber, and issued to petitioner its bill of lading * * *; that the rate of freight was not named * * *, but, under the terms of said bill of lading and under the law, the rate of freight was governed and fixed by the published classifications and tariff of said railroad company; that said company did not guarantee any specific routing of said shipment, but reserved the right to route the same, and said company was bound to apply and protect the lowest published rate in effect from Winona, La., to Hanna I. T., * * *; that, under a published tariff at that time in force and effect, issued by said Arkansas Southern Railway Company and its connecting carriers, known as I. C. C. No. 1,819 (which said tariff has been subsequently adopted by the C., R. I. & P. Ry. Co. and numbered 21,283), the rate of freight applicable to dressed lumber from Winona, La., to Hanna, I. T., was 23 cents per 100 lbs., applying via Ruston, La., Vicksburg, Shreveport & Pacific Railway, Kansas City Southern Railway, and Ft. Smith & Western Railway; that, a few days prior to this shipment, petitioner's manager called up the traffic office of the Arkansas Southern Railroad Company, at Ruston, La., by telephone, and had quoted the above rate, of 23 cents per cwt., on dressed lumber, to Hanna, I. T.; that at the above rate, which was in force and effect and should have been applied, the total freight charge on said shipment would have been $ 109.71 * * *; that, instead of protecting the above route, as was its duty to do, the said Arkansas Southern Railroad Company permitted said shipment to be moved via El Dorado, Ark., and the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway; that petitioner was required to pay a charge of $ 152.66 on delivery of said shipment for transportation, and at Ft. Smith, Ark., before shipment would be moved farther, petitioner was required to pay to the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company the additional sum of $ 136.60, and at Hanna, I. T., before said shipment would be delivered to the consignee, petitioner was required to pay the additional charge of $ 44.96, making a total sum, which petitioner was forced to pay by reason of said shipment having been misrouted by the fault of the Arkansas Southern Railway Company, of $ 334.22; and petitioner is entitled to recover the difference between $ 334.22 and $ 109.71, the rate which should have been charged, to wit, $ 224.51. In the alternative, if the court should for any reason determine that the Arkansas Southern Railroad Company was not bound to route the shipment via the cheapest route and protect the rate of 23 cents per cwt., as above alleged, then petitioner avers that the rate applicable to the said shipment of lumber via the route over which it actually did move, viz., El Dorado, Ark., St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway, and Ft. Smith & Western Railroad, as shown by published tariffs in force and effect at the time, was 32 cents per 100 pounds, on which basis the amount of freight would have been only $ 152.64, and, in any event, petitioner is entitled to recover the difference between that amount and the actual amount paid, to wit, $ 181.58."

It is further alleged that, since the date of the transaction in question, the Arkansas Southern Railroad Company has been merged in the Rock Island, Arkansas & Louisiana Railroad Company, and that the latter company is being operated by the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company under a contract whereby the company last named has become responsible for its obligations. Petitioner, therefore, prays that both of said last-mentioned companies be cited, and that it have judgment against them in solido for $ 224.51, with interest, at 5 per cent. per annum from December 7, 1905, until paid.

Opinion.

The general rule in regard to the exercise of jurisdiction by the state and federal courts is stated by the Supreme Court of the United States as follows:

"A legal or equitable right acquired under the state laws may be prosecuted in the state courts, and also, if the parties reside in different states, in federal courts. So, rights, whether legal or equitable, acquired under the laws of the United States, may be prosecuted in the United States courts, or in the state courts competent to decide rights of the like character and class, subject to this qualification: That, when a right arises under a law of the United States, Congress may, if it see fit, give to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • W.L. Shepherd Lumber Co. v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • March 24, 1927
    ... ... 631 ... For ... decisions in other state and federal courts, see, also, ... Pine Tree Lumber Co. v. Chicago, R.I. & P. Ry. Co., ... 123 La. 583, 49 So. 202; Tex. & Pa. R. Co. v ... ...
  • Coad v. The Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • October 5, 1915
    ... ... accord with our conclusion. Pine Tree Lumber Co. v ... Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. (La.) 123 La. 583, 49 So ... 202; St. Louis, ... ...
  • Johnson v. Quad Drilling Corp.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • March 23, 1956
    ...La.App., 199 So. 427, 429, certiorari denied, in the following language: 'It was held in the case of Pine Tree Lumber Company v. Chicago R. I. & P. Railroad Company, 123 La. 583, 49 So. 202, as the syllabus thereof shows, that: 'Where an interstate carrier represents to a shipper that a cer......
  • Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Lena Lumber Co.
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • May 1, 1911
    ...upon the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Federal courts to pass upon and allow the claims involved in this case. Act, § 22; 49 So. 202. Appellant's contention that if there conflict between the State law and the act of Congress the State law must yield, is conceded; but there is no c......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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