Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Consolidated Companies, Inc.

Summary

The Louisiana Supreme Court considered whether a shipper’s change to the routing of a freight shipment was effective when the original bill of lading was not surrendered or amended as required by a carrier’s tariff. The court held that the lower courts correctly rejected the railroad’s claim for an undercharge because the tariff’s use of “should” was directory rather than mandatory, and affirmed the judgment for the defendant.

Holdings

1. The tariff's use of the word 'should' was directory rather than mandatory; therefore, failure to surrender the original bill of lading or provide a bond or other security did not necessarily invalidate the change of routing.
2. The plaintiff was not entitled to recover the claimed $100.74 undercharge, and the judgment rejecting the demand was affirmed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a shipper's change of routing was effective even though the original bill of lading was not surrendered for endorsement or exchange and no bond or other security was provided.
2. Whether the tariff provision stating that the original bill of lading 'should' be surrendered or that substitute security should be given imposed a mandatory prerequisite to a change of routing.

Disposition

affirmed