B-127752, JAN. 10, 1957

B-127752, JAN. 10, 1957

TO MR. L. D. LAWRENCE, JR., ASSISTANT TRAFFIC MANAGER, HOOVER MOTOR EXPRESS COMPANY, INC.:

YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 12, 1956, FILE 383.05, REQUESTED RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION OF JUNE 27, 1956, WHICH SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR $65.88 IN ADDITION TO THE CHARGES ALREADY PAID FOR TRANSPORTATION ON BILL OF LADING WY 1280867.

THE GROUNDS ON WHICH RECONSIDERATION IS URGED ARE: (1) THAT UNDER THE HOLDING IN UNITED STATES V. CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, 200 F.2D 263, THE UNITED STATES IS REQUIRED TO PAY YOUR CLAIM FOR ADDITIONAL CHARGES; AND (2) THAT THE SHIPMENT INVOLVED A THREE-LINE HAUL SINCE THE MOTOR TRANSPORT COMPANY SIGNED THE BILL OF LADING AS AGENT OF THE INITIAL CARRIER.

THE CHICAGO, ROCK ISLAND AND PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY CASE IS NOT IN POINT. IN THAT CASE, THE COMMODITY CREDIT CORPORATION, AN INSTRUMENTALITY OF THE UNITED STATES, BROUGHT SUIT TO RECOVER FOR SHORTAGES OF GRAIN SHIPPED ON A UNIFORM DOMESTIC BILL OF LADING. THE COURT HELD THE ACTION TO BE BARRED BECAUSE OF THE CORPORATION'S FAILURE TO FILE A CLAIM IN WRITING WITH THE CARRIER WITHIN THE NINE MONTH LIMITATION CONTAINED IN THE COMMERCIAL BILL OF LADING WHICH WAS THE CONTRACT OF CARRIAGE, POINTING OUT THAT THE CORPORATION, UNDER ITS CHARTER ACT, 15 U.S.C.A. SECS. 714B AND 714C, WAS AUTHORIZED TO CONTRACT FOR SUCH TRANSPORTATION AND REQUIRED TO UTILIZE THE USUAL FACILITIES OF TRADE AND COMMERCE, I.E., TO USE COMMERCIAL, RATHER THAN GOVERNMENT, BILLS OF LADING. HERE THE CARRIER, NOT THE GOVERNMENT, IS THE CLAIMANT; THE TRANSPORTATION WAS FURNISHED ON A GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING, NOT A COMMERCIAL ONE; AND THE MATTER CONCERNS AN ALLEGED UNDERCHARGE, NOT LOSS OR DAMAGE.

REDUCED TO ITS ESSENTIALS, YOUR CLAIM DEPENDS UPON THE UNPROVED ASSERTION THAT MOTOR TRANSPORT PARTICIPATED IN THE LINE-HAUL TRANSPORTATION OF THIS FREIGHT AT THE REQUEST OF THE GOVERNMENT. THIS WAS DISCUSSED FULLY IN OUR DECISION OF JUNE 27, 1956, WHEREIN WE POINTED OUT THAT YOUR OWN SHIPPING DOCUMENTS DEMONSTRATE THAT MOTOR TRANSPORT DID NOT PARTICIPATE AS A LINE- HAUL CARRIER. YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 12 OFFERS NOTHING ON THIS POINT THAT HAS NOT ALREADY BEEN CONSIDERED. IN THE ABSENCE, AS HERE, OF PROOF SUFFICIENT TO OVERCOME THE SHOWING MADE BY THE BILL OF LADING AND THE RELATED SHIPPING DOCUMENTS, OUR SETTLEMENT OF MARCH 15, 1956, IN CLAIM TK- 525281, WAS CORRECT, AND THE CONCLUSION REACHED IN OUR PRIOR DECISION IS REAFFIRMED.