State v. Florida East Coast Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 20 April 1915
• Parties: STATE ex rel. RAILROAD COM'RS v. FLORIDA EAST COAST RY. CO.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

68 So. 761

69 Fla. 491

STATE ex rel. RAILROAD COM'RS v. FLORIDA EAST COAST RY. CO.

Florida Supreme Court

April 20, 1915

Original proceedings in mandamus by the State, on the relation of the Railroad Commissioners, against the Florida East Coast Railway Company. Peremptory writ denied.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

A railroad company has a right to load or unload its cars where its facilities or appliances for such work are, and may not be required to establish other facilities for such purpose to accommodate each patron.

A carrier which renders an additional service to shippers or consignees in carrying freight from or to warehouses or points on private or industrial side tracks for shipment or delivery is entitled for such service to reasonable compensation.

Rule 15 of the rules governing the transportation of freight formulated and prescribed by the Railroad Commissioners prohibiting, among other things, any charge whatever by a 'railroad having the line haul, for placing for loading an empty car at any warehouse or other point on its own line or side track, or for switching the loaded car to or from the same either for delivery or transportation,' is valid upon its face, and a carrier which resists its enforcement has the burden of proving that the rule operates to deny the carrier a reasonable compensation for a special or additional service.

The service of delivering freight to consignees in car loads on private or industrial sidings is a service which may not in the present state of the law be required of railroads, nor is it a service which is forbidden. If the service is of benefit to the patron of the road, and involves some service and expense to the railroad, and forms no part of the transportation or haul, but is in addition thereto, the railroad is entitled to charge for the service, and such charge may not be confined to the actual cost of it.

COUNSEL

F. M. Hudson, of Tallahassee, for relators.

Alex. St. Clair-Abrams, of Jacksonville, for respondent.

OPINION

ELLIS J.

An alternative writ of mandamus was issued in this cause requiring the respondent to observe and obey rule 15 of the rules governing the transportation of freight prescribed by the Railroad Commissioners of Florida in this:

'That as to all intrastate shipments of which you shall have the line haul, you, the said Florida East Coast Railway Company, shall make, exact, or assess no charge whatever for placing for loading any empty car at any warehouse or other point on your own line or side tracks, or for switching the loaded car to or from the same either for delivery or for transportation, or for switching car load shipments to and from industries located on any of your own side tracks on your said line, whether designated by you as private side tracks or otherwise, either for the movement of empty car after unloaded or for handling inbound cars to be loaded, and in this, that you shall withdraw from your said tariffs of terminal charges, so far as the same shall apply to intrastate shipments of which the said Florida East Coast Railway Company shall have the line haul, all provisions for any charge for switching car load shipments to and from industries located on your own side tracks, whether designated as private side tracks or otherwise, at points on your line, either for the movement of empty cars after unloaded or for handling inbound cars to be loaded, except those provisions in accordance with said Rule 15,' or to appear on a certain day before this court and show cause why it refuses so to do.

The return was filed January 13, 1913, to which the relators interposed a demurrer and a motion to strike certain portions of the return. Both the demurrer and motion to strike were overruled. State ex rel. Railroad Com'rs v. Florida East Coast R. Co., 65 Fla. 420, 62 So. 593.

Rule 15 of the rules and regulations prescribed by the Railroad Commissioners for the 'government of the transportation of persons and property on the railroads in Florida' is a general rule, applicable to the transportation of freight and applies to all railroads in the state. It prescribed: First, a charge of $2 per car, without regard to weight or contents, for transporting, switching, or transferring a loaded car from any point on any railroad to a connecting railroad, or to any warehouse, side track, or other point within the switching limits of the place (this applies to all railroads except the one having the line haul); second, that no railroad should decline to transport, switch, or transfer any such car, or to receive it from any connecting railroad for such purpose; third, that the switching limits of any place should be the limits usually operated there, but in no case less than three miles; fourth, that no railroad should reduce any of its switching limits without first obtaining the approval of the Railroad Commission; fifth, that in transferring, switching, or transporting a car between such points it became necessary to pass over the tracks of any intermediate railroad the charge of $2 should be divided between the railroads at interest, excluding the one having the line haul; sixth, that when a charge was made for transferring, switching, or transporting a loaded car between such points, no additional charge should be made for the accompanying movement of the empty car in the opposite direction; seventh, that no charge whatever should be made by a railroad having the line haul for placing, for loading, an empty car at any warehouse or other point on its own line or side track, or for switching the loaded car to or from the same either for delivery or transportation.

There is a provision to the effect that the rule should not interfere with any prevailing legal rate for the transportation of freight between different stations, and should not apply to freight that does not pay a direct freight transportation charge in connection with a switching charge.

It was charged in the alternative writ that the respondent, the Florida East Coast Railway Company, refused to obey the rule, and was disregarding it, in that the respondent had by its tariff of terminal charges then in force fixed switching charges at '$2 per car to cover switching car load shipments to and from industries located on private side tracks at all points on this line, this charge to include the movement of empty cars after unloaded, also handling inbound to be loaded,' and that the respondent was charging on 'intrastate shipments $2 per car for switching car load shipments, of which the company has the line haul, to and from industries located on certain of its own side tracks which said company designates as private side tracks at divers points on its said line of railway both for handling cars inbound to be loaded upon such side tracks and for the movement of empty cars from the said sidetracks after unloading.'

In other words, the rule seeks to prohibit any charge whatever by a railroad having the line haul for placing, for loading, an empty car at any warehouse or other point on its own line or side track, or for switching the loaded car to or from the same either for delivery or transportation, and the writ charged the respondent with violating this feature of the rule.

The return by the respondent, among other things, avers:

'(1) That the Florida East Coast Railway has at every station on the line of its road a free delivery track or siding to which cars will be taken and delivered and removed therefrom without any switching charges whatsoever to the consignor or consignee; (2) that at divers points on the line of this respondent's road there are and have been, in addition to the free delivery track, certain switch tracks or spurs used entirely for private interests, and that to deliver or take cars from said switching tracks or spurs involves extra service and extra expense to this respondent;' that such switch tracks or spurs were constructed for private interests with the understanding and agreement that switching charges should be paid, and that they do not form part of the regular delivery spurs or switch tracks of this respondent; that 'respondent says that, under the rule set forth in the alternative writ, this respondent would be compelled to switch cars on these private spurs or tracks without charge to the consignor or shipper, although every car put on these switches or spurs or taken therefrom involves an extra service and an extra expense to this respondent; that on the free delivery tracks cars intended for these tracks, or to be taken therefrom, are left on these tracks or taken therefrom with but little or no delay or additional expense to this respondent; that cars delivered to or taken from the spurs or switching tracks hereinbefore set forth involve considerable delay and expense to this respondent; that this respondent has been compelled to keep and maintain special locomotives at St. Augustine, West Palm Beach, and Miami to switch cars to and from those spurs or switch tracks; that at other points this respondent's freight trains have to be delayed for hours at a time in taking out cars and delivering them to private interests on these switching tracks or spurs, involving this respondent in considerable additional expense in the consumption of fuel and the hire of employés; that during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1910, the expense directly chargeable to switching service, where special locomotives were employed at St. Augustine, West Palm Beach, and Miami, was approximately $1,000 per month; that at other points where this switching was done by the regular freight trains the average cost, by reason of the delay and additional expense and additional service, was about $2.50 per car; that the approximate aggregate expense...