Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Hall

• Citation: 72 S.W. 1052
• Parties: TEXAS & P. RY. CO. et al. v. HALL.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL>
• Decision Date: 21 February 1903
• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas

72 S.W. 1052

TEXAS & P. RY. CO. et al. v. HALL.^*

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

February 21, 1903.

Appeal from District court, Mitchell County; W. R. Smith, Judge.

Action by Q. D. Hall against the Texas & Pacific Railway Company and another. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

B. G. Bidwell, for appellant Texas & P. Ry. Co. Henry & Henry, for appellant Iron Mountain Ry. Co. Shepherd & Crockett, for appellee.

CONNER, C. J.

Q. D. Hall instituted this suit in the district court of Mitchell county, Tex., against the Texas & Pacific Railway Company and the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company, to recover damage and injury to a shipment of live stock. The petition is voluminous, but we think that the following briefly but sufficiently states the substance of it: That the defendants operated a through line of railway as connecting lines from Iatan, Tex., to the National Stockyards at East St. Louis, Ill., the Texas & Pacific Railway Company operating that part of the through line extending from Iatan, Tex., to Texarkana, Tex., and the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company operating that part of the through line from Texarkana, Tex., to the said National Stockyards. That plaintiff had, on the 10th day of November, 1900, 269 head of steers at Iatan, Tex., ready for shipment, and the defendants were notified by plaintiff that he intended them for the market of November 13, 1900, at the National Stockyards. That said defendants were promising speedy transportation. That the cattle left Iatan on November 10, 1900, at 7 p. m.; were unloaded too soon at Ft. Worth at 12:30 p. m., November 11th, and delayed at many places along the route between Iatan and East St. Louis, which delays were specifically named; and finally arrived at the National Stockyards and were unloaded at 7 a. m., November 14th, about 24 hours late. That the steers were roughly and improperly handled by the defendants. That they were kept on the cars without rest, food, or water, for 60 hours between Ft. Worth and their destination. That as a result of the delay, rough treatment of defendants, and the loss of the favorable market of November 13th plaintiff's loss in the sale of his steers amounted to the aggregate sum sued for, which he asked to be apportioned between the defendants, and that he have judgment against them for the several amounts apportioned against them respectively, together with interest and costs. Both defendants answered by general denial, each making a sworn denial of partnership, and further pleading various provisions of the shipping contract limiting their liability as it existed at common law, and restricting the obligation and undertaking of each defendant to its own line. The court, upon the jury's verdict, entered judgment in favor of plaintiff against the Texas & Pacific Railway Company for $253.06, and against the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company for $506.02, both amounts bearing interest from November 14, 1900, from which judgment both railway companies named have appealed to this court.

Here referring to the facts in a general way, it may be stated that the evidence supports the allegations of appellee's petition as above outlined; and it further appears that, upon the termination of the shipment by the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company at East St. Louis, the cattle were by said company delivered to what is designated as the "Terminal Railway Company" about 1 a. m. of November 14th, and the latter company transported said cattle to the National Stockyards, a distance of some 12 miles, and there unloaded and delivered the cattle at 7 a. m. of the same morning, as alleged. Inasmuch as it thus appears that there was some five or six hours' delay in the shipment on the part of a railway company not a party to the suit, it is insisted in the first and second assignments that the court was in error in charging the jury that, in event they found the facts of negligence and injury as alleged, they would then find for plaintiff, and "assess his damages at the market value of all cattle so killed (if any) at that point of destination at the time they should have arrived there, to which you will add the difference, if any, in the market value of all said cattle that may have...