United States Express Co. v. Joyce

• Decision Date: 04 February 1904
• Docket Number: 4,621
• Citation: 69 N.E. 1015,36 Ind.App. 1
• Parties: UNITED STATES EXPRESS COMPANY v. JOYCE ET AL
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

69 N.E. 1015

36 Ind.App. 1

UNITED STATES EXPRESS COMPANY v. JOYCE ET AL

No. 4,621

Court of Appeals of Indiana

February 4, 1904

Rehearing denied April 20, 1904.

Transfer denied June 22, 1905.

From Gibson Circuit Court; O. M. Welborn, Judge.

Action by John E. Joyce and others against the United States Express Company. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

Baker & Daniels and Fields & Harmon, for appellant.

Buskirk & Brady and Embree & Burson, for appellees.

OPINION

ROBY, J.

Action by appellees for damages on account of appellant's alleged negligence in the transportation of two car loads of horses from Princeton, Indiana, to Buffalo, New York. The dates of shipment being May 23 and June 13, 1901. The trial court, upon request, made a special finding of facts, and stated conclusions of law thereon, in accordance with which judgment was rendered against appellant for $ 2,195 on account of damages to the shipment of May 1, and $ 1,499.60 on account of damages to the shipment of June 13. Interest being included in both cases. Exceptions by appellant to the conclusions of law against it were duly taken, and the correctness of such conclusions thereby presented to this court.

The facts found, so far as their statement is necessary, are as follows: Contracts between the parties were entered into on the respective dates named, containing, among others, the following provisions: "Notice to Shippers-- The shipper will value his stock, which valuation will be inserted in this contract, the charge for carriage will be based on such valuation. United States Express Company. Limited Liability. Live stock contract. (Duplicate.) To be given to the shipper. This contract witnesseth: * * * (1) That the express company undertakes to forward to the point reached by the express company which is nearest to destination the animals * * * hereinafter mentioned, of which shipper declares himself to be the owner * * * to wit: * * * Twenty-eight horses consigned to * * * Buffalo, New York, for the sum of $ 225, * * * which charge is fixed by and based upon the value of said animals * * * as declared by the shipper, as hereinafter mentioned. * * *

"(3) The charges on the shipment described above, at the values specified below will be as follows:

"United States Express Company's charges. For horses, jacks or mules of a value not exceeding $ 75 each, $ 225. Connecting company's charges, $ . * * *

"(4) When the value declared by the shipper exceeds the value stated above, an addition to the above-mentioned charge will be made according to the following schedule, to wit: When the merchandise rate is not over $ 1 per 100 lbs, the additional charges will be 5 per cent of the excess valuation; over $ 1 per 100 lbs, and not over $ 2 per 100 lbs, 7 per cent of the excess valuation; over $ 2 per 100 lbs, and not over $ 3 per 100 lbs, 10 per cent of the excess valuation; over $ 3 per 100 lbs, and not over $ 5 per 100 lbs, 12 per cent of the excess valuation; over $ 5 per 100 lbs, 15 per cent of the excess valuation.

"(5) The shipper in order to avail himself of said alternative rates, and in consideration thereof being asked by the express company to value said property, now declares the values hereinafter mentioned to be the true values of said animals * * * so to be shipped as follows: Number and kind--twenty-eight horses, value $ 2,100.

"(6) * * * The shipper hereby releases and discharges the express company from all liability for delay, injuries to or loss of said animals * * * from any cause whatever, unless such delay, injury or loss shall be caused by the negligence of the agents or employes of the express company, and in such event the express company shall be liable only to the extent of actual damage, which shall in no event exceed the valuation herein declared by the shipper."

Where property is thus valued, the valuation being substantial and not unreasonable, fairly procured, full opportunity for choice given, without coercion or fraud, and the rate of transportation is based thereon, the same being reasonable and graduated according to the value so fixed, such valuation is valid, and furnishes the measure by which damages are assessed in case of loss.

The recitals of the contract are not conclusive but they are prima facie true, and place the burden of showing that the valuation stated was not so fixed as to be enforceable upon the shipper, who may, however, always aver facts destroying the validity thereof, and establish them if he can. The burden, therefore, in this case, upon such proposition, was upon appellees, who made averments in the complaint attacking the validity of the written contract. The special findings in this regard do not support such averments, and the contracts must therefore be taken as they were written, and the valuation therein made as that fixed by the parties. Had the property thus valued been destroyed en route, the measure of the shipper's recovery would have been thereby fixed. Hart v. Pennsylvania R. Co. (1884), 112 U.S. 331, 5 S.Ct....