Court Opinion

ID: 9833614
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 22:52:55.968269+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:05.019195
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
At a former day of this term this court reversed and remanded this cause upon the proposition that there was sufficient testimony tending to show that appellant, the Texas Central Railroad Company, had delivered 10 bales of the entire shipment of cotton to its codefendant the International & Great Northern Railroad Company, and, if such delivery was made, the former company would be entitled to recover to that extent against the latter company. Upon further consideration of the question, on motion for rehearing, we have reached the conclusion that) we fell into error in that respect, and that the trial court was correct in instructing the jury to find for the International & Great Northern Railroad Company. The undisputed testimony shows that the Texas Central Railroad Company received from ap-pellee’s agent at Hico, Tex., 235 bales of cotton, marked “H. E. M.,” which it agreed and obligated itself to deliver to such agent or his assigns at Galveston, Tex. The bill of lading or written contract was assigned to the agent of appellee at Galveston, Tex., but only 223 bales of the cotton was delivered to such agent. The proof shows that the delivery of the 223 bales referred to was made by the International & Great Northern Railroad Company, and we held in our former opinion that there was proof tending to show that the latter company had received 10 more bales of the 235 bales received by appellant at Hico. In that holding we were mistaken. There was testimony tending to show that of a certain shipment of cotton under a different bill of lading, which cotton purported to be marked “T. I. S.,” there were 10 bales marked “H.. E. M.” That shipment was from Hico, and made by the same company that acted as appellee’s agent in the shipment here involved; but the proof further shows that, in addition to the 235 bales of cotton marked “H. E. M.” and delivered to the Texas Central Railroad Company under the contract here sued on, there was another shipment a few days later of 20 bales marked “H. E. M.,” that did not *918belong to appellee. One witness testified' that in checking out cotton transferred at Waco from the Texas Central Railroad to the International & Great Northern Railroad, he discovered that 10 bales of a larger shipment described in the bill of lading as marked “T. I. S.” were marked “H. E. M.,” but the 10 bales referred to may have been part of the second shipment from Hico of 20 bales marked “H. E. M.,” or they may have been part of the 235 bales involved in this suit, but the burden did not rest upon the International & Great Northern Railroad Company, and did rest upon the other litigants, to show the latter fact, and, such fact not being shown, the trial court properly held that the testimony failed to show any liability against the International & Great Northern Railroad Company. The clear and undisputed proof showed that appellant, the Texas Central Railroad Company, was liable to the plaintiff for 12 bales of cotton, the amount for which judgment was rendered.
For these reasons, the motion for rehearing is granted, and judgment affirmed.
Affirmed.