Stineman Coal Mining Co. v. Pennsylvania R. R.

Citations

• 241 Pa. 509
• 88 A. 761
• 1913 Pa. LEXIS 811

Syllabus

<p>Carriers — Railroad companies — Discrimination as to car supply —Interstate commerce — Jurisdiction of state courts — Estoppel.</p> <p>1. Tbe state courts have jurisdiction to entertain an action to recover damages from a railroad company for unlawful discrimination in the distribution of coal cars, although such discrimination relates to a supply of cars used in intrastate or in interstate commerce at the option of the shipper.</p> <p>2. Where in such an action it appeared that in times of car shortage the output of each mine was rated, and available cars were distributed among shippers in proportion to the output of their mines, and that defendant’s system of distribution provided that cars owned by shippers should not be counted against them in determining the number of defendant’s cars to which such shippers should be entitled, but defendant departed from this system in dealing with plaintiff, and counted plaintiff’s ears against plaintiff, in allotting cars among the shippers, whereby plaintiff’s competitors received a greater portion of defendant’s cars than plaintiff could secure, the court did not err in holding that defendant was not justified in departing from the system of distribution which it had adopted, although the interstate commerce commission, after the period covered by the action had ordered that privately owned cars should be* so counted against shippers in determining the number of cars to which they should be entitled, and had declared that the practice forbidden was a violation of the Interstate Commerce Act, defendant could not be heard to say that its discrimination in favor of plaintiff’s competitor was justified by a subsequently promulgated order of the interstate commerce commission.</p> <p>Puritan Coal Mining Co. v. Penna. E. E. Co., 237 Pa. 420, followed.</p>