Robichaux v. Segura Sugar Co.

Citations

• 110 La. 706
• 34 So. 744
• 1903 La. LEXIS 695

Syllabus

<p>CONTRACTS — BREACH—EVIDENCE—DAMAGES.</p> <p>1. Plaintiff, a cane grower, sold his cane crop to the defendant, a sugar factory. The cane was to be delivered at a switch on the tramroad of the defendant at the rate of not less than one-seventieth of the total crop per day, the grinding to begin not later than October 25th. The tramroad traversed the lands of plaintiff and other landowners, who had agreed to give a right of way and build the roadbed; defendant agreeing to haul the cane of these landowners at 50 cents per ton. The landowners did all the work that was required of them on the roadbed, defendant’s engineer superintending the work. Owing to rainy weather and early frost, the roadbed proved deficient, and the juice of the cane proved of poor quality, so that the grinding was slow, and the car service on the road was bad. Owing to these causes, defendant was unable to receive the cane according to ■contract. The plaintiff would have delivered the cane if defendant had been ready to receive it. The grinding season lasted more than 70 days. Part of the cane soured, and was lost. Held, defendant is answerable for the lost cane at the contract price.</p> <p>2. The price was to be regulated by the market price of sugar. To prove this price, evidence of what defendant paid during the season for cane received under the contract with plaintiff, and under similar contracts with other ■cane growers, was properly admitted; and the average of the prices so paid may be accepted as the price which the cane lost would have brought if defendant had accepted the delivery of it according to the contract.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>