Yazoo & M.V.R. Co. v. Searles

• Decision Date: 20 February 1905
• Parties: YAZOO & MISSISSIPPI VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY v. CHARLES J. SEARLES
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

37 So. 939

85 Miss. 520

YAZOO & MISSISSIPPI VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY v. CHARLES J. SEARLES

Supreme Court of Mississippi

February 20, 1905

FROM the circuit court of Warren county, HON. GEORGE ANDERSON Judge.

Searles the appellee, was plaintiff, and the railroad company, the appellant, was defendant in the court below. From a judgment in plaintiff's favor for $ 60,861.30 and costs, the defendant appealed to the supreme court. The opinion states the facts.

Reversed and remanded.

Smith Hirsh & Landau, Mayes & Longstreet, and Blewette Lee, for appellant.

McLaurin, Armistead & Brien, Green & Green, and Claud Pintard, for appellee.

[The briefs of counsel were withdrawn or lost from the record before it reached the reporter, hence no synopsis of them is given.]

OPINION

TRULY, J.

Stated in chronological sequence, the facts giving rise to this litigation are as follows:

On October 1, 1900, under the firm style of Searles Bros., C. J. Searles and T. M. Searles commenced business in Vicksburg, Miss. At that time, and for several years before then, the delivery of cars and the assessing of demurrage for detention thereof by consignees of freight had been under the direction of the Louisiana Car Service Association, of which N. S. Hoskins was manager. Of this car service association both the railroads entering the city of Vicksburg were members. On December 8, 1900, C. J. Searles, the managing partner of the firm of Searles Bros., wrote to N. S. Hoskins requesting leniency on the part of the car service association in consideration of his promptness in handling the largest part of his business and in view of the fact that he was then laboring under the disadvantage of not being able to secure an available warehouse in which to unload freight which might be consigned to his firm in car-load lots. From this date until April, 1902, the record fails to disclose any variance in regard to the question of demurrage or car service between the firm of Searles Bros. and the car service association, or either of the railroads over which that firm received freight. From April until August 28, 1902, C. J. Searles, doing business as Searles Bros. and as successor to the Southern Brokerage Company, positively refused to pay any more car service or demurrage charges, and announced his deliberate determination not to recognize in any manner the authority of the car service association or its employes to assess said charges, and refused to have any conference in regard thereto with the manager or the local agent thereof. Frequent overtures were made to Searles by representatives both of the railroads and of the car service association seeking to arrive at some amicable adjustment of the pending dispute in reference to car service charges previously accrued, conditioned only that Searles would in the future recognize and comply with the rules of the car service association in reference to demurrage charges. All propositions of settlement or of arbitration were rejected by C. J. Searles, who firmly adhered to his announced decision of not recognizing the authority to any extent of the car service association. While this condition of affairs existed, on August 28, 1902, after first submitting the proposed order to the division superintendent of the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company, and receiving his approval thereof, N. S. Hoskins, manager of the Louisiana Car Service Association, directed that no cars should thereafter be switched to the warehouse where Searles Bros. and the Southern Brokerage Company transacted business or businesses. This warehouse, which Searles had secured subsequently to the writing of his letter to Hoskins, hereinbefore referred to, was located on a spur belonging to the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company, on which were also situated the warehouses of nearly all of Searles Bros.' chief competitors in the business in which all were engaged--wholesale produce, commission, and brokerage. For many years it had been the custom of the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company to switch freight received in car loads to the warehouses of the consignees. After October, 1902, C. J. Searles continued business as successor of the Southern Brokerage Company; managing partner of Searles Bros., composed of himself and his brother, T. M. Searles; and as C. J. Searles & Co., composed of himself alone. All these businesses were conducted at the same warehouse, and the refusal to switch cars or freight applied to all alike. From August 28, 1902, the date of the issuance of the order declining to further switch cars, until March 9, 1903, the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company, acting under said order issued by the manager of the car service association, with the approval of its superintendent, uniformly refused to place cars of freight at Searles' warehouse, but continued as theretofore to switch all freight in car- load lots to other merchants engaged in similar business occupying warehouses similarly located. The Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad did, however, furnish to Searles, upon request, empty cars for the shipment of freight from his warehouse to other points, and did, with one exception, transfer all cars received over its road to the Alabama & Vicksburg Railway when so directed by Searles. On March 9, 1903, the chancery court granted to Searles a mandatory injunction commanding the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company to switch and place at Searles' warehouse freight received in car-load lots in the same manner that it did freight received for his competitors in business also occupying warehouses. Pending this suit, and prior to final hearing, an agreement was entered into, by which Searles and the railroad company each agreed to pay any demurrage which might fall due thereafter under the rules governing that matter, such payment to be without prejudice to the rights of either party in the pending litigation. Thereupon C. J. Searles, in the name of C. J. Searles & Co., filed his declaration in the circuit court against the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company, claiming that between the date of August 28, 1902, when first refusal to place cars was made, and the date of the filing of the suit, the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad had received over its own line, and refused to switch and place at his warehouse, or had refused to receive from the Alabama & Vicksburg Railway and switch and place at his warehouse, one hundred and thirty-five cars of freight in car-load lots, by reason of which action he had been compelled to receive his freight on the wagon and delivery tracks of the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad, all some distance from his warehouse, entailing on him an additional expense, for labor, draying, and extra clerk hire, of $ 1,905.05; and he also claimed in his declaration a statutory penalty of $ 500 for each car load of freight which the railroad had refused to switch and place at his warehouse, averring that the railroad and the car service association had discriminated against him; that the car service association was a "trust" or "combine" within the meaning of the Mississippi statute in that regard, whereby he was entitled, as the injured party, to receive the penalty allowed under the statute. The case was tried before the circuit judge, a jury being waived. In addition to the foregoing facts, it developed upon the hearing that Searles alone of all merchants in Vicksburg engaged in similar business refused to recognize the authority of the car service association; that, while disputes over bills had from time to time arisen between other merchants and the railroads in reference to the correctness of several assessments of demurrage charges, such disputes had been adjusted or were in process of adjustment, and that no order had been issued refusing to switch cars for any other merchant, though such order had been threatened in several instances when the settlements had been unduly delayed. It is undisputed in the record that cars would have been switched for Searles had he agreed to pay demurrage charges when the same might rightfully accrue under the rules of the car service association. It was further in evidence that the Louisiana Car Service Association operated solely in regard to the assessment of demurrage under rules in reference thereto adopted and promulgated by the Mississippi Railroad Commission, and that car service charges were not claimed except under the circumstances authorizing under said rules the collection thereof; that the order refusing to have cars switched and placed for Searles was issued, not by order of the executive board of the car service association or with its knowledge, but by its manager, after the same had been submitted to and approved by the division superintendent of the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad, and was issued solely for the purpose of enforcing compliance on the part of Searles with the rules of the Mississippi Railroad Commission, authorizing the collection of demurrage under certain stated circumstances. The circuit judge held that the car service association was a trust and combine within the meaning of ch. 88, p. 125, Laws 1900, and awarded Searles damages in the sum of $ 60,861.30, being the statutory penalty for each car of freight which the railroad had refused to place at his warehouse, and, in addition thereto, the amount paid out for the drayage and handling of the freight contained therein. From this judgment the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company appeals.

The first question presented for consideration in arriving at a decision in this case is: What is a "trust" or "combine" within the meaning and condemnation of the statute cited? A determination of this question necessitates a brief...