Discrimination by Railroad Companies in Freight-Transportation Rates Charged to Connecting Lines and Routes

Checkout our iOS App for a better way to browser and research.

No railroad company shall discriminate in its rates or tariffs for freights in favor of any line or route connected with it as against any other line or route; nor, when a part of its own line is sought to be run in connection with any other route, shall such company discriminate against such connecting line or in favor of the balance of its own line. Rather, such company shall charge the same rates for all and shall afford the usual and customary facilities for interchange of freights to patrons of all routes or lines alike. Any refusal of the same shall afford a right of action similar to that provided in Code Section 46-9-212.

(Ga. L. 1874, p. 94, § 3; Code 1882, § 719s; Civil Code 1895, § 2214; Civil Code 1910, § 2657; Code 1933, § 93-411.)

Cross references.

- Prohibition against unjust discrimination in freight-transportation rates by common carriers, § 46-9-52.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Section not restricted to physical connections and appliances.

- Former Civil Code 1910, § 2657 (see O.C.G.A. § 46-9-213) should not be restricted in its application only to physical connections and physical appliances. It applied to every facility necessary for the safety and convenience of passengers and for the prompt transportation of freight. Wadley S. Ry. v. State, 137 Ga. 497, 73 S.E. 741 (1912), aff'd, 235 U.S. 651, 35 S. Ct. 214, 59 L. Ed. 405 (1914).

Receiving freight without prepayment.

- Under former Civil Code 1910, § 2657 (see O.C.G.A. § 46-9-213) it was competent for the commission to declare as an unlawful discrimination a course of conduct whereby a railroad company, connecting with other railroad companies at each of its termini, which converge to a common point, received from one of its connections freights destined to points on its own line without requiring prepayment of the earned charges of the favored carrier, and declined to receive from the connecting carrier at the other terminus freight destined to points on its own line without prepayment of the freight charges earned by that connecting carrier. Wadley S. Ry. v. State, 137 Ga. 497, 73 S.E. 741 (1912).

Who may bring action.

- While a competing railroad might sue for damages to its general business, the shipper, who is damaged by the wrongful requirement of unshipping, draying and reshipping, and the consequent waste, delay, and injury, has a right of action against the railroad company causing the same. Logan & Co. v. Central R.R., 74 Ga. 684 (1885).

Lessor as party.

- Where suit was brought against a railroad company, which operated another railroad under lease, for a refusal to receive goods and transport them over the line so operated by it, there was no necessity to make the lessor a party defendant to the action under former Code 1882, § 719s (see O.C.G.A. § 46-9-213). Central R.R. v. Logan & Co., 77 Ga. 804, 2 S.E. 465 (1886).

Penalty.

- If a railroad company had not complied with the law as prescribed in former Code 1882, § 719s (see O.C.G.A. § 46-9-213), it was liable to the penalty prescribed in former Code 1882, § 719q (see O.C.G.A. § 46-9-212). Central R.R. v. Logan & Co., 77 Ga. 804, 2 S.E. 465 (1886).

Under former Code 1882, §§ 712q and 719s (see O.C.G.A. §§ 46-9-212 and46-9-213), upon a refusal to receive and transport goods brought over a connecting line, when such facilities were afforded to other connecting roads, or to the patrons of other roads, or of its own road, damages were presumed up to ten percent of the value of the property, and in order to increase the recovery for damages and expenses from ten percent to the limit of 25 percent fixed by the statute, all the elements of real or actual damages which were admissible in other actions may be shown. Central R.R. v. Logan & Co., 77 Ga. 804, 2 S.E. 465 (1886).

Cited in Logan & Co. v. Central R.R., 74 Ga. 684 (1885); Kates v. Atlanta Baggage & Cab Co., 107 Ga. 636, 34 S.E. 372, 46 L.R.A. 431 (1899); Augusta Brokerage Co. v. Central of Ga. Ry. Co., 121 Ga. 48, 48 S.E. 714 (1904); Wimberly v. Georgia S. & F. Ry., 5 Ga. App. 263, 63 S.E. 29 (1908); Georgia Pub. Serv. Comm'n v. Atlanta Gas Light Co., 205 Ga. 863, 55 S.E.2d 618 (1949).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 13 Am. Jur. 2d, Carriers, § 169.

C.J.S.

- 13 C.J.S., Carriers, §§ 195, 370.

ALR.

- Franchise provisions for free or reduced rates of public service corporations as within constitutional or statutory provision prohibiting discrimination, 10 A.L.R. 504; 15 A.L.R. 1200.

Right of electrical company to discriminate against a concern which desires service for resale, 12 A.L.R. 327; 112 A.L.R. 773.

Discrimination by public utility company in respect of extension of credit, 12 A.L.R. 964.


Download our app to see the most-to-date content.