January 14, 1975 

The Honorable Martin D. Eichelberger 

Criminal District Attorney 

Waco, Texas Opinion No. H- 493 

Dear Mr. Eichelberge I: 

Re: Applicability of Motor 

Carrier Act, V. T. C. S., 

art. 911b to livestock 

commission companies 

which furnish transportation services. 

You ask whether livestock commission companies violate the Motor 

Carrier Act, V. T. C. S., article 911b. when, without a permit from the 

Railroad Commission, they furnish transportation service to their customers. 

Livestock commission companies are formed to act as sales agents for 

ranchers and other owners of livestock. A prospective seller will enter into 

a consignment contract with a commission company under the terms of which 

the company will sell his livestock at an auction, extract its commission 

from the proceeds, and then pay the remainder to the seller. Apparently, 

some companies own commercial vehicles which they use to pick up the 

livestock consigned to them for sale; an additional fee is charged the seller 

for this service. Companies which offer transportation services will also 

agree to deliver any livestock sold at: one of their auctions to the purchaser 

at an additional cost. Your quest-ion is whether livestock commission companies may furnish such services without first obtaicing a contract carrier 

permit from the Railroad Commission. 

Insofar as it is applicable, the Motor Carrier Act req-sires any person or 

company interding tc operate as a “contract carrier” first to obtain a permit 

from the Railroad Commission. V. T. C. S. art. 911b. 5 3. A “contract carrier” 

is defined in the Act as anyone who uses a motor vehicle to transport property 

for compensation or hire over any highway in the State other than as a common 

carrier. V. T, G.S. art. 9i,lb, $1 (h)- Private motor vehicle owners are 

expressly excluded from the definition of “contract carrier” contained in the 

p0 2227 
The Honorable Martin D. Eichelberger. page 2 (H-493) 

Act and need not obtain a permit from the Railroad Commission. V. T. C. S. 

art. 911b § lb. A private motor vehicie owner is defined in section la(b) of 

the Act as: 

Any person transporting farm implements, livestock, 

livestock feedstuffs, dairy products, horticultural products? 

&al products, agricultural products, timber in its 

natural state, or wool and mohair of which such person 

is the bona fide owner on a vehicle of which he is the bona 

fide owner to and from the area of production and to and 

from the market or place of storage thereof: provided, 

however, if such person (other than a transportation company) has in his possession under a bona fide consignment 

contract livestock, wool, mohair, milk and cream, fresh 

fruits and vegetables, or timber in its natural state under 

contract, as an incident to a separate, fixed, and established 

business conducted by him the said possession shall be 

deemed ownership under this Act; 

Under this definition, then, a company which transports livestock it owns 

in its own vehicles from the area of production to the market is a private 

motor vehicle owner and is not required to obtain a contract carrier permit 

from the Railroad Commission, For the purposes of this definition one who 

as an incident to a separate business is in possession of livestock which he 

is transporting pursuant to a bona fide consignment contract is considered 

to be the owner of the livestock. 

When the livestock companies about which you have asked pick up 

livestock from a seller in order to t,ransport it to an auction site, they 

clearly fit the definition of private motor vehicle carrier set out in the Act. 

They use their own vehicles, and they are operating pursuant to consignment 

contracts which arise out of their sales agency business. Accordingly, the 

companies may make these pick ups and charge for them wi.thout first obtaining 

a contract carrier permit from the Railroad Commission. 

Furthermore, it is cur opinion that livestock commission companies 

continue to act as pPiv.ate motor vehicle owners under the Act when they 

l~ater deliver livestock to a purchaser even though by that time the livestock 

has been sold and they no longer technically own the livestock. A case almost 

pe 2228 
The Honorable Martin D. Eichelberger, page 3 (H-493) 

directly in point is Whitman v. State, 308 S. W. 2d 884 (Tex. Grim, App. 1958), 

In Whitman cattle had been sold to a purchaser at an auction; as part of the 

sales agreement but for an additional consideration, the seller agreed to 

deliver the cattle to the purchaser, The cattle were transported in trucks 

belonging to the seller. While in route, one of the trucks was stopped by 

a Railroad Commission inspector who learned that it was being operated 

without a contract carrier permit. The Court of Criminal Appeals held 

that the seller was operat,ing as a private motor vehicle owner and d!~d not 

need a contract carrier perm~it. It did not matter that the sale had been 

completed before the cattle were hauled because delivery of the cattle 

was part of the agreement pursuant to which ownership changed hands. 

Whitman indicates that under the Motor Carrier Act one who sells livestock and for an additional consideration agrees to deliver the livestock 

to the purchaser retains his status as a private motor vehicle owner even 

though he no longer owns the livestock, Thus livestock commission companies may deliver the cattie they sell in their own vehicles without obtaining contract arrier permits from the Railroad Commission; under the 

Motor Carrier Act they will be treated as private motor vehicle owners. 

SUMMARY 

Under the Motor Carrier Act a company which transports 

livestock it owns - - or i,s in possession of pursuant to a 

bona fide consignment con.tract - - in its own vehicle from 

the area of productTon to the market is considered a private 

motor vehicle owner and nerd not obtain a contract carrier 

permit from the Railroad Commission. The status of 

private motor vehic!.e owner is retained when the livestock 

is later del,ivered to a purchaser as part of a sales agreement. 

A 

ry truly yours, 

OHN L. HILL 

Attorney General of Texas 

p. 2229 
The Honorable Martin D. Eichelberger, page 4 (H-493) 

APPROVED: 

DAVID M. KENDALL, First Assistant 

C. ROBERT HEATH, Chairman 

Opinion Committee 

p. 2230