B-144950, FEB. 27, 1962
Highlights
TO TRANSCON LINES: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 13. WE HAVE GIVEN CAREFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE CONTENTIONS URGED IN YOUR LETTER BUT THERE IS NOTHING THEREIN CONTROVERTING THE REPORT OF THE SHIPPING AGENCY THAT TRAILER 4889 WAS LOADED TO FULL VISIBLE CAPACITY. IT IS OUR VIEW THAT THE PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN BY THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION IN CURTIS LIGHTING. IS CONTROLLING NOT ONLY AS TO THAT CASE BUT AS TO OTHER FULLY LOADED VEHICLES. THE COMMISSION AT PAGE 578 SAID: "ONCE A VEHICLE IS LOADED TO CAPACITY. WHICH IS DESIGNED TO ACCORD TRUCKLOAD SERVICE TO LESS-THAN- TRUCKLOAD SHIPMENTS.'. SUCH LANGUAGE IS GENERAL. ARE NOT APPLICABLE ON A SHIPMENT WHERE THE VEHICLE IS LOADED TO FULL CAPACITY.
B-144950, FEB. 27, 1962
TO TRANSCON LINES:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 13, 1961, FILE C-1 B.433.RM, ACKNOWLEDGED NOVEMBER 27, IN WHICH YOU REQUEST FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISIONS OF OCTOBER 24, 1961, AND MAY 23, 1961, B-144950. THESE DECISIONS SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE OF THE SUM OF $119.60 CLAIMED AS EXCLUSIVE USE OF VEHICLE CHARGES IN CONNECTION WITH A SHIPMENT OF ELECTRICAL INSTRUMENTS IN TRUCK NUMBERED 4889 FROM WARNER ROBINS, GEORGIA, TO TULSA, OKLAHOMA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING AF-8192617 DATED FEBRUARY 7, 1959.
WE HAVE GIVEN CAREFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE CONTENTIONS URGED IN YOUR LETTER BUT THERE IS NOTHING THEREIN CONTROVERTING THE REPORT OF THE SHIPPING AGENCY THAT TRAILER 4889 WAS LOADED TO FULL VISIBLE CAPACITY. ALSO, IT IS OUR VIEW THAT THE PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN BY THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION IN CURTIS LIGHTING, INC. V. MID-STATES FREIGHT LINES, INC., 303 I.C.C. 576, IS CONTROLLING NOT ONLY AS TO THAT CASE BUT AS TO OTHER FULLY LOADED VEHICLES. THUS, THE COMMISSION AT PAGE 578 SAID:
"ONCE A VEHICLE IS LOADED TO CAPACITY, A SHIPPER DERIVES NO BENEFIT FROM EXCLUSIVE USE, WHICH IS DESIGNED TO ACCORD TRUCKLOAD SERVICE TO LESS-THAN- TRUCKLOAD SHIPMENTS.'
SUCH LANGUAGE IS GENERAL, AND NOT CONFINED TO THE CASE THEN BEFORE THE COMMISSION.
WE AGREE THAT UNDER THE DECISION OF THE T.I.M.E. AND DAVIDSON CASES, 359 U.S. 464, THE GOVERNMENT MAY NOT RECOVER MONIES ASSESSED BY CARRIERS UNDER APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THEIR TARIFFS. THERE APPEARS TO BE NOTHING IN THE T.I.M.E. CASE, HOWEVER, TO PRECLUDE OUR USE OF THE PRINCIPLE EXPRESSED IN THE CURTIS LIGHTING CASE THAT EXCLUSIVE-USE CHARGES, DESIGNED TO COVER TRUCKLOAD SERVICE TO LESS-THAN-TRUCKLOAD SHIPMENTS, ARE NOT APPLICABLE ON A SHIPMENT WHERE THE VEHICLE IS LOADED TO FULL CAPACITY.
ACCORDINGLY, ON THE BASIS OF THE RECORD BEFORE US, THERE IS NO PROPER BASIS TO MODIFY OUR PREVIOUS DECISIONS, WHICH ARE AFFIRMED.