State v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
| Decision Date | 27 March 1906 |
| Citation | 40 So. 875,51 Fla. 578 |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. ELLIS, Atty. Gen. v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. CO. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Headnotes Filed May 3, 1906.
In Banc.
Application by the state on the relation of William H. Ellis, Attorney General, for writ of mandamus to the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company. Demurrer sustained, and writ quashed.
Syllabus by the Court
When the railroad commissioners make a valid order for the prevention of unjust discrimination and for the observance of rates of freight and passenger tariff made and promulgated by them, it is the duty of the railroad company or other common carrier to obey such order, and to promptly, faithfully, and completely comply with all its legal requirements, and such duty will be enforced by mandamus.
The railroad commissioners of Florida have such powers only as are expressly or impliedly conferred upon them by statute.
When mandamus is brought to enforce an order of the railroad commissioners, such order should appear on its face to be within their power and authority. If the order contains a material and mandatory provision which does not appear from the terms of the alternative writ to be within their power and such writ commands a compliance forthwith, a demurrer thereto will be sustained, since the writ must be enforced as a whole, if at all.
The railroad commissioners are empowered to make rates upon the subjects of transportation, not to make rates for particular persons or corporations.
The court does not take judicial knowledge that there are but two telegraph companies in the state.
A rate for transportation of men, poles, wires, and materials, that is applicable by its terms solely to one-named telegraph company, is a discrimination, either for or against such company, and will not be enforced by mandamus.
If a railroad company undertakes to render as a common carrier particular services to one person, it cannot lawfully refuse to render similar services to other persons under like circumstances upon the payment of like compensation; and if it does so refuse, it may be compelled by mandamus to render to all under like circumstances the same service in the same manner, and for the same compensation.
Fred T. Myers and Danl. W. Rountree, for relator.
John E Hartridge & Son, for respondent. This is an original proceeding in mandamus brought by the Attorney General in the name of the state under the provisions of chapter 4700, p. 76, Acts 1899 to enforce an order made by the railroad commissioners.
The alternative writ is as follows:
'The State of Florida, to the Atlantic Coast
Line Railroad Company, a Corporation:
'Whereas by a petition caused to be filed in this court by the railroad commissioners of the state of Florida, in the name of the said state upon the relation of William H. Ellis, Attorney General of said state, it has been made to appear:
'That at the city of Tallahassee, on the 7th day of October, 1905, before the railroad commissioners of the state of Florida, the Postal Telegraph Cable Company, a body corporate under the laws of the state of New York, and engaged in a general telegraphic business throughout the United States, with lines of wire in the several states, and in the state of Florida, filed its complaint against the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, a corporation engaged in the business of a common carrier, and having a line of railroad in the said state of Florida, wherein the said telegraph company alleged that desiring to extend its line in said state, it had, by regular condemnation proceedings in the circuit court for Duval county, Fla., and by the payment of the award fixed by said proceedings, acquired a right of easement to construct, operate and maintain a line of poles and wires upon the right of way of the said defendant railroad company, from the city of Jacksonville to the city of Lakeland, in the said state, and running through the counties of Putnam, Volusia, Orange, Osceola, and Polk. That said railroad company, under its charter, and as a common carrier, agreed to distribute between its stations, and has distributed between its stations, for the Western Union Telegraph Company, a foreign corporation engaged in the same business as petitioner, its men, poles, wires, and other material, for the erection, maintenance, operation, and repair, construction, and reconstruction of its lines of wire along the lines of said railroad in said state, and also for all branches of extension thereof, and the said defendant company distributed all men, poles, wires, and other materials, between its stations through the counties of Putnam, Volusia, Orange, Osceola, and Polk for said Western Union Telegraph Company, in the erection of its lines of poles and wires, and has continued, and is continuing, to distribute said men, poles, wires, and materials for said company between its said stations for the maintenance, operation, and repair of said lines, of poles and wires of said Western Union Telegraph Company, under the supervision of the employés of said company. That said Postal Telegraph Cable Company, prior to the filing of its said complaint, made application to and demanded of said railroad company that for a just and reasonable compensation, to be paid said railroad company, said company should render it a service similar to the service rendered to said Western Union Telegraph Company in the distribution between its said stations, in said counties, of the men, wires, poles, and materials of said telegraph company, for the purpose of the construction, maintenance, operation, and repair of its said line of poles and wires along said right of way of said railroad company. That said railroad company refused to render said services to said telegraph company. That such refusal constituted an unjust discrimination against said telegraph company, and in favor of the Western Union Telegraph Company, giving the said Western Union Telegraph Company an undue and unreasonable preference and advantage over it, and subjecting it to an undue and unreasonable prejudice and disadvantage, in utter violation of the laws of Florida, and of the rules and regulations adopted in pursuance thereof by the honorable railroad commission of the state of Florida, and the prayer of which complaint was for an order directing the said railroad company to render to said telegraph company a similar service, and thus discontinue and prevent the unjust discrimination.
'And that thereupon due notice was served upon the said Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company to show cause before said railroad commission at Tallahassee, on the 6th day of November, 1905, why such discrimination should not cease, and why the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company should not be required to perform a like service for the Postal Telegraph Cable Company for a reasonable compensation.
'And that at the time and place fixed in said notice, the said cause came on to be heard, and the said Postal Telegraph Cable Company and the said Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company appeared before the commissioners, by their respective counsel, and the commissioners heard the pleadings, testimony, and argument of counsel, and reserved their decision.
'And that thereafter, to wit, on the 11th day of November, 1905, the said railroad commissioners made and handed down their decision, which is in the words and figures following, to wit:
'Order No. 79. Railroad Commission, State of Florida, to the Atlantic Coast Line
Railroad Company:
To continue reading
Request your trial
- State v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
-
State v. Jacksonville Terminal Co.
... ... Jacksonville, Fla., to and from which all passenger trains of ... the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company and Seaboard Air ... Line Railway Company, Florida East Coast ... ...
-
Aandahl v. Great Northern Railway Co.
...Washington, 142 U.S. 492; Atlantic etc. Co. v. Wilmington R. Co. 111 N.C. 463; R. Commissioners v. Oregon R. Co. 19 P. 702; State v. Atlantic etc. R. Co. 40 So. 875; Elliott, Railroads, § 682; Re Pacific R. Commission, 32 F. 241; Eastern R. Co. v. Concord R. Co. 47 N.H. 108; State v. Chicag......
-
Pensacola Elec. Co. v. Soderlind
... ... upon a certain line of street railroad track of the ... defendant, located upon Government ... the statute, section 3147, General Statutes of the State of ... Florida, 1906, under which this suit is brought, is in ... & Eng. Ann ... [60 Fla. 176] Cas. 272; State ex rel. v. Atlantic Coast ... Line R. R. Co., 51 Fla. 578, 40 South. Rep. 875; ... State ... ...