92 N.E.2d 813
No. 32045Supreme Court of Ohio.
Decided May 31, 1950.
Public Utilities Commission — Motor-freight-transportation-classification ratings — Order changing classification ratings of burial cases, coffins, etc. — Elimination of discrimination — Order of commission not unlawful or unreasonable.
APPEAL from the Public Utilities Commission.
This cause is in this court on appeal by the Casket Manufacturers Association of America and The Belmont Casket Manufacturing Company from an order of the Public Utilities Commission increasing various intrastate motor-freight-transportation-classification ratings of burial cases, caskets, coffins, vaults and accessories to a uniform rating of two times first class.
A freight classification is a device by means of which various articles of commerce are segregated into one or another of a limited number of classes according to respective transportation characteristics so that each article may relatively bear its fair share of the transportation burden.
Page 561
By the order complained of, the Public Utilities Commission attempted to eliminate discrimination between descriptions of traffic, since it was contended that caskets were improperly classified and unduly preferred over other articles of traffic.
A variation in the classification ratings results in a corresponding variation in the total charge which the shipper must pay for his commodity, even though the scale of rates remains unchanged.
Appellants contend that the increase in the rating is unjust, unreasonable, prejudicial to appellants and preferential to those casket manufacturers resident of contiguous or nearby states.
At the hearing before the commission, various commodity characteristics were considered, such as density, value, susceptibility to damage, loading, unloading, handling and delivery, and ability to bear rate.
As to an assumed first class rate of $1 and a fourth class rate of 50 per cent of first class, the evidence discloses that a truck of a 1,000 cubic-foot capacity, if loaded with 24,000 pounds of steel or wood, would produce a revenue of $120. On the other hand, the same truck loaded with caskets with a density of six pounds per cubic foot would have a load weight of less than 6,000 pounds, due to inability to utilize all available space and, therefore, a double first class rate would produce a revenue of less than $120.
As to value, a witness was asked, “Are they [caskets] relatively valuable cargo?” The witness answered, “Yes. Caskets are higher in value than a great many other articles that move in transportation.”
As to cost of handling, the record discloses that undertakers do not have docks or platforms to facilitate the unloading of caskets; that caskets must be handled with some degree of care; that two men are required to unload a casket with the proper degree of care; and
Page 562
that at times a second man is not available at the undertaker’s establishment.
Much evidence was introduced at the hearing relating to the ability of the manufacturer to absorb the resulting increased rate.
Messrs. Sater Sater, for appellants.
Mr. Herbert S. Duffy, attorney general, and Mr. Kenneth B. Johnston, for appellee.
BY THE COURT.
The question presented to this court for determination is whether the order of the Public Utilities Commission is unlawful or unreasonable.
From an examination of the record, this court is of the opinion that the order of the Public Utilities Commission is not unlawful or unreasonable and is, therefore, affirmed.
Order affirmed.
WEYGANDT, C.J., MATTHIAS, HART, ZIMMERMAN, STEWART, TURNER and TAFT, JJ., concur.