Document: 350 U.S. 162 76 S.Ct. 244 100 L.Ed. 173 SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE of the United Statesv.UNITED STATES America, Interstate Commerce Commission, et al. UTAH POULTRY & FARMERS COOPERATIVE, Armour and Company, Swift v. UNITED Nos. 6, 7, 11 12. Argued Oct. 12, 1955. Decided Jan. 9, 1956. Mr. Marvin E. Frankel, Washington, D.C., for appellants Secretary Agriculture States. Samuel R. Howell, I.C.C. Wm. F. Zearfaus, Philadelphia, Pa., appellees Intervening Railroads. Opinion Court by Justice HARLAN, announed CLARK. 1 These cases involve validity railroad tariff provisions exonerating appellee railroads from liability stated percentages damage to shell eggs shipped over their lines. The come us direct appeal1 a judgment three-judge district court in Utah,2 which dismissed an action brought set aside enjoin order Commission3 approving such provisions. We noted probable jurisdiction on October 14, 1954.4 2 Claims against egg shipments steadily rapidly increased years following 1939, particularly eastern seaboard area.5 In 1950 railroads, believing that because difficulties proof they were being exposed not responsible, filed with Commission proposed similar form those approved under review. After investigation hearing,6 concluded ordinarily contained substantial amounts responsible—namely, (a) existing prior shipment, (b) unavoidably arising transit inherently fragile nature eggs. averently amount was found be 3% packaged at railhead points 5% elsewhere. On basis this finding, although rejecting higher-percentage railroads,7 reasonable—and hence authorized include schedules8—the tolerance provision: 3 'On placed packages rail point origin no claim shall allowed where physical destination does exceed contents containing damaged Where exceeds 3%, claims all excess if develops carrier liability. 4 'Exception.—Where bona fide certificates Federal or State inspection agencies showing extent determined shipment immediately tender transportation indicate actual other than 2%, percentage as shown certificates, plus 1% used lieu specified Section.' 5 An otherwise identical provision applicable 'eggs origin' reasonable 5%. 6 It is claimed these violate § 20(11) Act, 24 Stat. 386, amended, 49 U.S.C. 20(11), U.S.C.A. provides any common subject Act receiving property interstate 'shall liable * loss, damage, injury caused it *, contract, receipt, rule, regulation, limitation character whatsoever, exempt hereby imposed *.' 7 below (one judge dissenting) held did pre-shipment unavoid-ably-caused represented tolerances 'caused by' railroads; regulations, providing means determining limit railroads' proper liability, but operated simply eliminate liable. 8 attack six principal grounds: (1) has power prescribe regulations governing disposition; (2) based averages necessarily embrace forbidden since, definition, some will contain less 'average' resulting relieved its full liability; (3) are in-transit even though 'unavoidable';9 (4) supported evidence; (5) approval uniform nation-wide unreasonable light wide differences egg-damage experience consignees located different areas country;10 (6) conclusion do Commission's findings. Our agreement last contention makes unnecessary consider arguments, we may assume, decide, invalid reasons assigned. 9 justification limiting rests upon two distinct propositions: there present every case railroads—and 20(11)—in percentages; deduction operates merely prevent improperly railroads. accept purposes discussion first proposition. infirmity find report rather second proposition sassumed findings can say reasonably based. Such essential remove prohibition lack necessary justify renders regulations. See Florida States, 282 194, 215, 51 119, 125, 75 291. Indeed, so far fail support tends affirmatively precisely opposite conclusion—namely, unlawfully know better way illustrate inadequacies manner inferences raised unanswered would, accepted, lead opposing conclusion. 10 place, unable discover include—or should deemed include—the deducted them. At law, would afford defense damage. To complete defense, included required, evidence had been claimed. Similarly, regulation authorizing representing inferring seem finding type adequate reveal substantially case. Far making however, indicates normally As described customary visual examination layer 36 time, continuing only until visible found, none succeeding layers looked at.11 Inasmuch 'damage' sort includes most minor imperfections, inference seems inevitable much overlooked. This strengthened statement could 'by candling clicking, detected kind performed at' destination.12 And practice further indicated Department studies cited overlooked inspections range between 3.6% 7.3%.13 suggested latter appear inspection—and nearly equal greater tolerances. If true, reduction operate 'limit' approximately tolerance. 12 Nor answer consignee entitled make more thorough prevailing entails. By effect requiring prove his impose burden disproving law carrier's establish. Whether alter proof, nothing intention doing so. have believed commercial practices carriers improper tolerances, applied same setting, remedy situation. pervert purpose deal realistically problem now seek ground technically possible consignees, departing normal practices, avoid Especially true absence suggestion commercially feasible.14 13 Another inadequacy arises failure distinguish kinds application favorable supporting conclusions study average contains 4.8% 'checked' 'stained' 0.3% broken eggs.15 Presumably, therefore, represent proportions—that is, primarily checked stained nominal Checked salable reduced price unlike eggs, partial loss. provisions, differentiate types apparently authorize without regard But permit offsetting total 20(11). 14 A third major respect falls short establishing results relationship legal loss asserted. thus assumed 'physical damage' properly equated 'loss' that, assumption, existence fact, individual acceptability whole. observed, 'commercially sound' invariably damage,16 when great unacceptable grade loses value. When unsound received, consignee, suffer presumably result selling lower salvage, 'reconditions' replacing visibly and, necessary, packaging materials. From process Commission,17 apparent sound claim, asserted carrier, then consists cost reconditioning case—that labor material costs removed.18 15 Viewed above terms, becomes apparent. highest specifications prescribed 5%,19 received considered salabel price. Thus presence itself causes affords additional recondition sound, cliam railroad, follows made within 20(11).20 Any circumstances relieve 16 leaves uncertainty impact cf. States Chicago, M., St. P. P.R. Co., 294 499, 504—505, 510—511, 55 462, 464—465, 467, 79 1023, strong impression likely manner. answers problems raised, indeed them all. Since violation must aside, reversed. 17 Reversed. 18 FRANKFURTER, concurring. 19 desirable state, summarily, I join court's opinion. 20 starting-point Court's determination issue recognition fact Cummins Amendment constitute affirmative congressional formulation goods transported it. import bar legalizing tariffs common-law imposing dispensed shipper negligence causing breakage unavoidable things whether operating thing without, equally 'inherent vice'—there since unrelated conduct. 21 general principles deduced decided law. situation complicated one before precludes mechanical mathematical generalities. sued might able introduce demonstrating established sense adequately require demonstration incidence preshipment particular shipment. sure, reply proving undetected undetectable destination. One reason principle, called, conclude throw inevitably shipper's allow subtract whatever he wanted recovery. 22 Likewise, urge suffered get open subtracted up large part ordinary therefore made. complicating factor 284 I.C.C., 401. For example, permitted Grade AA 23 requires impaired. numerous factors, indicated, dogmatic views regarding law's treatment this. unsuitability proceedings trial issues main why pertaining conflicting interests entail. long guided carriers' takes due account factors thereby involved, stay hands. case, clear allowable 'tolerances' sanctioned tariffs. clear, foundation review wanting. 1023. precondition clarity establish frailty examine correctness alternative meanings attributed dubious cannot stand tell what foggy conclusions. 25 joining opinion Court, read implying infirmities matter offend theoretical arguments laws probability, satisfy cruder standards adjudications courts sustain determinations Commission. Specifically, assume various generate controlling rules allowing ascertain i.e., substantiality appropriate matter. 26 MINTON, whom REED BURTON join, dissenting. 27 meet see question, freely conceded argument, promulgate accepts sake argument proceeds unfair unreasonable, 1919. National Poultry, Butter Egg Ass'n New York Central 52 47. 28 earlier consideration provided certain deductions incident natural shrinkage grain, violated said: 29 'There appears little merit rule violates inhibition clause act losses connections, inherent commodities themselves attributable human agency.' A. B. Crouch Grain Co. Atchison, T. S.F.R. 41 717—718. also Amendment, 33 682. 30 Chesapeake O.R. Thompson Mfg. 270 416, 46 318, 70 659. Carrier limited it.' Adams Express Croninger, 226 491, 148, 151, 57 314. fairly into receipt does, prohibited Obviously search fault commodity. think prescribing, after hearing, defects commodity transported. impossibility deciding humpty-dumpty question who broke regulation. yardstick measuring 31 What did, 1919, railpoint origin, damages 3%. recovery carrier. off 32 specifically found: 'We percent rehandled repacked unlawful. packed justified, percent, respectively, reasonable. *' 403. 34 embodies basic studies, 3.4% typical loaded cars origin; 1.7% 'incident movement transit.' 393—394. Further, York, important terminal rail, 'performed view detecting eggs.' Id., 396. hearing voluminous handled railpoint, during make. Certainly majority understanding, yet undecided tariff. approximation noncarrier 35 reasons, forth length District 119 F.Supp. 846, affirm judgment. §§ 1253, 2325, 2325. Agriculture's standing derives 36, 1291(a) (b), 1291(a, b). Utah Poultry Farmers Cooperative 846. 377. 348 807, 44. per car 1800% 1940 1947, 390, paid 1947 exceeded 50% gross revenue shipments, id., 387. 552, 15(7), 15(7). originally 4% 6% opposed 407—408. Promptly order, refiled percentages. They go May 2, 1952. codifies liable, negligence, it, unless shows occasioned shipper, acts God, public enemy, authority, vice See, e.g., Bills Lading, 671, 679; 421—422, 319, 654; 506—507, 509, 152, 153, 'unavoidable' vice' exception. contend, exception induced external force, however slight unavoidable, solely intervention decay, fermentation, evaporation shrinkage. Austin Seaboard Airline Cir., 188 F.2d 239, 240—241; Akerly Railway Exp. Agency, 96 N.H. 396, 400—402, 77 A.2d 856, 860 861; Jackson Perkins Mushroom Transp. 351 Pa. 583, 590—591, 635, 639; Watson Bros. Domenico, 118 Colo. 133, 135—137, 194 P.2d 323, 325. increase 'substantial amounts' occurred principally connection territory Baltimore, Boston Newark 'Generally moved territories.' 385—386, 392. 395. 'candling,' each disclose detectable; 'clicking,' knocked together, revealing imperfections. implications uncontroverted 'The record handling delivered consignees. indicate, number claims, arriving exceeding 50 entire traffic cursory inspection.' Ibid. speculative reasoning hardly overcomes own explicit contrary, notes despite efforts packers careful 'absolute perfection impossible' overlooked, 393, adverse conditions test feasibility uncover usual grading out carload, while clearly so, utilized spotcheck inspection, inferred. Damage hand, actually found. 'Checked' cracks membrane unbroken: leakage 384, 385. 393. transferred new whole (36 eggs) course obviously removed replaced. 385, 399. Of (for eggs), 0.5% consist above, proportion well limit. immaterial given minimum sound. extensive assure right removed—a recover—would defeat mitigation very reconditioning. ask mitigating damages, accepted method unreasonable.

Category: 8