Thompson v. A. J. Tebbe & Sons Co.

241 S.W.2d 627, 1951 Tex. App. LEXIS 2186
Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided June 13, 1951·No. 4797·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

McGILL, Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nueces County, 28th Judicial District.

In a trial to the court without a jury ap-pellee as plaintiff recovered a judgment against appellant as defendant for $862.79 with interest from date at 6% per annum as damages to two carloads of onions shipped by plaintiff from Cotulla, Texas, to St. Louis, Mo., and diverted to Chicago, Ill., and there sold for plaintiff by La Mantia Bros. Arrigo Company, wholesale dealers and jobbers of fruits and vegetables.

The petition is in two counts. Count I relates to a shipment in car M.D.T. 6301 on May 17, 1946, and Count II to a shipment in car number A.R.T. 17861 made on May 21, 1946. It was alleged that the onions shipped in car 6301 were delivered to defendant on May 17, 1946 in a good and marketable condition and arrived in Chicago for the market of May 28, 1946 in a bruised and decayed condition showing evidence of rough handling upon arrival; that had the onions been properly carried and promptly delivered they would have been of the fair cash market value of $1,716.50, 'but due to the delay and rough handling by defendant they were of the market value of only $1,147.25, to plaintiff’s damage $569.25; that the onions shipped in car 17861 were delivered to defendant on May 21, 1946 in a good and marketable condition and arrived in Chicago for the market of May 28, 1946, and upon arrival were in a decayed and bruised condition showing evidence of rough, handling; that had the onions been properly carried -and promptly delivered they would have been of the fair cash market value of $1,785.00 but due to the delay and rough handling they were of the market value of only $1,337.50, to plaintiff’s damage $447.-50. Defendants answered by a general denial.

The court filed elaborate findings of fact ■and conclusions of law — twelve original fact findings on Count I and the same number on Count II, and three conclusions on each of Counts I and II. At the request of defendant he also granted seven additional fact findings on Count I and eight additional fact findings on Count II, and two additional conclusions on each count.

Appellant has presented 29 points on which he relies for a reversal of the judgment relating to Count I, and 18 points relating to Count II. We shall not attempt to state these points in detail. In general they attack the court’s findings because there is no evidence, or insufficient evidence, to support them, and complain of the court’s failure to make requested findings asserted to be shown by uncontro-verted evidence. We shall only refer to the findings deemed essential to a proper disposition of this appeal.

All appellant’s points are summarized under four groups: (1) There is no evidence and insufficient evidence that the condition of the onions at origin when loaded was good or sound; (2) no showing of the fair market value of the onions at destination bad they been transported with reasonable care, diligence and dispatch; (3) no showing of the fair market value of the onions on the date they actually arrived in the condition they actual *629 ly arrived; and (4) no evidence of negligence on the part of the carriers causing the damage found on arrival. We shall first discuss (3) above.

The court found (11) that the actual fair cash market value of the onions in car M.D.T. 6301 in their decayed condition upon arrival in Chicago was $1,147.25. He also found (10) that had this car been properly transported these onions would have been of the reasonable fair cash market value of $1,716.50 upon arrival. He found that the actual fair cash market value of the onions in car A.R.T. 17861 in their decayed condition upon arrival in Chicago was $1,337.50; (11) also that had this car been properly transported and delivered these onions would have been of the reasonable fair cash market value of $1,453.00 upon arrival. He concluded that plaintiff was damaged as to the onions shipped in car M.D.T. 6301 in the sum of $569.25, and as to those shipped in car A.R.T. 17861 in the sum of $115.50. An additional conclusion is that the damages are measured by the difference in value o'f the onions at the time they should have arrived if transported with reasonable care, diligence and dispatch, and their value in the condition and on the dates on which they actually arrived.

The additional conclusion unquestionably states a correct abstract proposition of law, under the Interstate Commerce Act governing interstate shipments such as these: Sec. 20(11), 49 U.S.C.A., which provides that the carrier shall be liable to the holder of the bill of lading “for any loss, damage, or injury to such property”, and “for the full actual loss, damage, or injury to such property”. Texas & N. O. R. Co., v. Searcy, Tex.Civ.App., 220 S.W.2d 366 (w. r. n. r. e.). It is at once apparent from the findings that the value which the court applied is the market value. Unless the findings as to market value are supported by the evidence the judgment is not supported by the findings since there are no findings as to any value other than market value.

Plaintiff introduced two inspection reports of the condition of the onions in car M.D.T. 6301 at its destination in Chicago. One is dated May 27, 1946, at 3:35 P.M., and was made by La Mantia Bros., Arrigo Company, which handled the onions for plaintiff. In this report the condition of the load and the grade and quality of the onions is thus described:

“Condition
of Load. 3 to 12" shift A to B end. No visible breakage •
Barbaros Fairly good quality, weak condition good pack irregular size
Quality 2 to 3½ in right doorway region bags at ends of car 2½ to 4½. Onions are clean, fairly well and wellformed, 5 to 10% ill shapes, firm fairly firm, crisp, with 40 to 30 weak open
Pack necks, none to 6 average 3% ifresh green sprouts 1 to 2" long skins are fairly well set to some loose and feathery. Fairly good to * * * good
Sizing color, 2 to 6% mechanical injury, 2 to 10 average 6% decay. Fairly good appearance.
Remarks Bermuda Onions Large size 3 to 4½ showing 40 to 50% decay.
(Stamped) 4717 White Onions, Fairly good quality, weak condition, good pack, Irregular size 1 to 2½. Onions are clean, fairly well and wellformed, 5 to 10% ill shapes firm fairly firm, crisp skins are fairly wellset to few loose and feathery, good color packs are damp and wet, 4 to 40% average 20% decay. Fairly good' and poor appearance.”

The other report, or certificate, is dated May 28, 1946, at 11:55 A.M. and was made by an inspector of the U. S. Department of Agriculture. In this certificate the onions inspected and their condition is thus described :

“Products inspected and distinguishing marks: Crystal wax Yellow Bermuda and Yellow Babosa type Onions in separate *630 paper-net sacks branded ‘Texas Onions Diamond T brand, A. J. Tebbe & Sons Co., Cotulla, Texas’. Crystal Wax type in 25-lb sacks, others in 50-lb sacks. Manifested as 510 sacks.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Thompson v. A. J. Tebbe & Sons Co., 241 S.W.2d 627, 1951 Tex. App. LEXIS 2186 (Tex. Ct. App. 1951).

241 S.W.2d 627 (Thompson v. A. J. Tebbe & Sons Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Missouri Pacific Railroad Company v. Elmore & Stahl
360 S.W.2d 839 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1962)
Missouri Pacific Railroad Company v. Duncan
353 S.W.2d 315 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1962)
Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Hillis
320 S.W.2d 687 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1959)
Texas and New Orleans Railroad Co. v. H. Rouw Co.
271 S.W.2d 666 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1954)
Texas Mexican Ry. Co. v. Slaughter
241 S.W.2d 749 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1951)
Thompson v. A. J. Tebbe & Sons Co.
241 S.W.2d 633 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1951)