Steele-Smith Dry Goods Co. v. Birmingham Ry., Light & Power Co.

• Decision Date: 26 November 1916
• Docket Number: 6 Div. 998
• Citation: 73 So. 215,15 Ala.App. 271
• Court: Alabama Court of Appeals
• Parties: STEELE-SMITH DRY GOODS CO. v. BIRMINGHAM RY., LIGHT & POWER CO.

73 So. 215

15 Ala.App. 271

STEELE-SMITH DRY GOODS CO. v. BIRMINGHAM RY., LIGHT & POWER CO.

6 Div. 998

Court of Appeals of Alabama

November 26, 1916

Appeal from City Court of Birmingham; H.A. Sharpe, Judge.

Assumpsit by the Birmingham Railway, Light & Power Company against the Steele-Smith Dry Goods Company to recover the difference between the amount paid it for electric lights, and the amount it claimed to be due for the months of April, May June, July, and August, 1913. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Allen Fisk & Townsend, of Birmingham, for appellant.

Tillman Bradley & Morrow and Roy M. Sterne, all of Birmingham, for appellee.

PELHAM, P.J.

The case was tried before the court without the intervention of a jury. There is no dispute or conflict in the evidence. A decision of the case turns on the proper interpretation to be given the word "general" in that clause of a ten-year contract entered into by and between appellant and appellee in 1906, wherein appellee agreed, in case of a "general" reduction of rates for light or power in Birmingham, the rates named in said contract would be reduced in proportion; the clause of the contract in question reading as follows:

"It is further agreed that, if the company [appellee] reduces the general rates for light or power in Birmingham the rates herein named shall be reduced in proportion to such reduction."

The rate for power is not involved in this controversy; the rate for lighting only being in question.

The special rate named in the 1906 contract is 6.63 cents per kilowatt hour for lights. At that time the general rate applying in Birmingham was 12 cents per kilowatt hour, with a maximum quantity discount of 35 per cent., making the net general rate to users of the maximum quantity named in the discount scale 7.80 cents per kilowatt hour. In 1907 the net general rate was reduced by increasing the maximum quantity discount, thus making the net rate to users of the maximum quantity 6 cents. At that time the rate to appellant was voluntarily reduced from 6.63 cents to 5.10 cents. In 1912 pursuant to an ordinance adopted by the city of Birmingham, appellee again reduced the general rate, fixing the gross rate at 10 cents, with a maximum quantity discount of 50 per cent. to users of 3,000 or more kilowatt hours in a month, making the net general rate to users of the maximum quantity 5 cents. The evidence also shows that appellee had ten-year contracts with certain business concerns in the city of Birmingham, whereby, in consideration of an agreement to take a minimum of 3,500 kilowatt hours per month, appellee granted a discount of 15 per cent. from the net rate after the allowance of the quantity discount of 50 per cent., thus making the net rate to parties having these contracts 4.25 cents.

At the time of the reduction of rates in compliance with the city ordinance of 1912 mentioned above appellee reduced the rate for lighting to appellant from 5.10 cents, the rate existing since 1907, to 4.25 cents. Appellant declined to accept this as the correct rate, contending at first for a rate of 3.08 cents. It is not shown how this rate was arrived at; and on appeal appellant withdraws this contention, asserting the true rate to be 3.612 cents--arrived at by taking the rate of 4.25 cents as the general rate, and reducing that in the same proportion that the contract rate of 6.63 cents was a reduction from the then...