B-133756, OCT. 25, 1957

B-133756: Oct 25, 1957

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

TO CENTRAL OF GEORGIA RAILWAY COMPANY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 9. YOU WERE ALLOWED $696.13 ON BILL OF LADING NO. WT-7727334 WAS COLLECTED BY SETOFF AGAINST THE AMOUNT FOUND ALLOWABLE IN THE SETTLEMENT. ALLOWABLE CHARGES ON THE DISPUTED SHIPMENTS WERE COMPUTED HERE ON THE BASIS OF THE SIZE OF THE CARS ORDERED AND ADEQUATE FOR THE SHIPMENTS RATHER THAN ON THE SIZE OF THE CARS FURNISHED. IT BEING NOTED THAT THE SERVICE ORDER NO. 68 QUESTION IS PRESENTLY INVOLVED IN UNITED STATES V. NO FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN ON YOUR CLAIM PENDING THE FINAL DISPOSITION OF THAT CASE WHICH HAS A BEARING ON YOUR PRESENT CLAIM. AT THAT TIME YOUR CLAIM WILL BE GIVEN FURTHER CONSIDERATION IN THE LIGHT OF THE JUDICIAL RULING.

B-133756, OCT. 25, 1957

TO CENTRAL OF GEORGIA RAILWAY COMPANY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 9, 1957, FILE B-29337 G-A, REQUESTING REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE NO. 681558, DATED FEBRUARY 21, 1957, ON YOUR CLAIM, PER BILL NO. N-5-29337-A-G-R-1361-3, FOR ADDITIONAL CHARGES ON SHIPMENTS FROM BROWNWOOD, TEXAS, TO STATESBORO, GEORGIA (BILL OF LADING NO. WT-7727334), AND FROM GAINSVILLE, TEXAS, TO SAND HILL, GEORGIA, (BILL OF LADING NO. WT 1422060), DURING MAY 1944.

FOR THE SERVICES PERFORMED UNDER BILLS OF LADING NOS. WT-1422060 AND WT- 7727334, YOU CLAIMED ON THE ABOVE SUPPLEMENTAL BILL ADDITIONAL CHARGES OF $1,189.79 AND $104.34, RESPECTIVELY. YOU WERE ALLOWED $696.13 ON BILL OF LADING NO. WT-1422060 AND AN OVERPAYMENT OF $232.92 ON BILL OF LADING NO. WT-7727334 WAS COLLECTED BY SETOFF AGAINST THE AMOUNT FOUND ALLOWABLE IN THE SETTLEMENT. THUS, YOUR CLAIM NOW APPEARS TO BE FOR THE AMOUNT DISALLOWED ON BILL OF LADING NO. WT-1422060 AND THE AMOUNT REFLECTED IN THE ACTION TAKEN ON YOUR CLAIM ON BILL OF LADING NO. WT-7727334.

ALLOWABLE CHARGES ON THE DISPUTED SHIPMENTS WERE COMPUTED HERE ON THE BASIS OF THE SIZE OF THE CARS ORDERED AND ADEQUATE FOR THE SHIPMENTS RATHER THAN ON THE SIZE OF THE CARS FURNISHED. THE DISPUTE INVOLVES INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION SERVICE ORDER NO. 68 AND YOU REQUEST PAYMENT OF YOUR CLAIM ON THE BASIS OF THE DECISION (IN FAVOR OF THE CARRIER) OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF CLAIMS IN ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD V. UNITED STATES, C.CLS. NO. 183-52, 140 F.SUPP. 569, INVOLVING THE CITED ORDER.

WE DO NOT VIEW THE QUESTION AS HAVING BEEN MADE THE SUBJECT OF A FINAL JUDICIAL DETERMINATION, IT BEING NOTED THAT THE SERVICE ORDER NO. 68 QUESTION IS PRESENTLY INVOLVED IN UNITED STATES V. NEW YORK, NEW HAVEN AND HARTFORD R. CO., NO. 574. (OCTOBER TERM, 1956), IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. ACCORDINGLY, NO FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN ON YOUR CLAIM PENDING THE FINAL DISPOSITION OF THAT CASE WHICH HAS A BEARING ON YOUR PRESENT CLAIM. AT THAT TIME YOUR CLAIM WILL BE GIVEN FURTHER CONSIDERATION IN THE LIGHT OF THE JUDICIAL RULING.