Hunter v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from New Madrid Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry G. Riley, Judge. (1) Interstate freight rates are establishéd when a schedule thereof is filed by a carrier with the Interstate Commerce Commission, and copies are furnished by the railway company to its freight offices, although such rates may not be “posted” as required by Sec. 6 of the Act to Regulate Commerce.
Read the full summary
Appeal from New Madrid Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry G. Riley, Judge. (1) Interstate freight rates are establishéd when a schedule thereof is filed by a carrier with the Interstate Commerce Commission, and copies are furnished by the railway company to its freight offices, although such rates may not be “posted” as required by Sec. 6 of the Act to Regulate Commerce. Such rates, when regularly established, are no longer the rates imposed by the carrier, but the rates imposed by the law. Railroad v. Oil Mill, 204 U. S. 449; Grain Co. v. Railroads, 12 I. C. C. Rep. 418. (2) A common carrier may…
1Opinion of the CourtCaulfield, J.
(after stating the facts). — I. The demurrer to the evidence was properly overruled. Plaintiff made a prima facie case by showing the rate of affreightment inserted in the bills of lading to be fourteen cents and that the defendant had exacted at destination,-and plaintiff had paid under protest, the amount sued for in excess of that rate. “Ordinarily the rate of affreightment inserted in a bill of lading is binding on the parties, and will be effectuated by the courts as agreed compensation for the services contemplated.” [Railroad v. Horne, 106 Tenn. 73, 59 S. W. 134; Wabash Ry. Co. v.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Cisco Oil MillSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- United States v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Wabash Railroad v. SloopSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Railroad v. HorneTennessee Supreme Court · 1900
- Wooden v. Western New York & P. R. Co.Superior Court of Buffalo · 1892
3Cited by5 opinions
- Akron, Canton & Youngstown Railroad v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1974
- Sheldon v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- International & G. N. Ry. Co. v. CarterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
- Bush v. MillerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1919
- Reed v. United States Vanadium Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1943