Story Case

The Y. L. & W. Railroad Company announced in its recent time table that the fare from Jonesboro to Kellesburg would be $5.78. But when Adam Board-man went to purchase his ticket, the agent refused to sell it to him at that price. Boardman showed the agent the quotation from the time table and insisted that he sell the ticket for the announced price. The agent, however, refused to do this and Boardman was compelled to pay the additional amount.

As soon as Boardman could consult an attorney, he brought suit against the railroad company for breach of contract. The company defended on the ground that the price stated in the time table was not an offer but only an invitation to deal. Is this true?

Ruling Court Case. Sears Vs. The Eastern Railway Company, Volume 14 Allen's Massachusetts Reports, Page 433; Volume 92 American Decisions, Page 780

The Eastern Railway Company was a common carrier of passengers between certain points in Massachusetts. It published a daily advertisement in the Boston Daily Advertiser, Post, and Courier, announcing that a train would leave Boston for Lynn at 9:30 P. M. every day except Wednesday and Saturday. Sears, who had consulted these advertisements, purchased a package of five tickets, between Boston and Lynn, which were good for any trip during that year. One Friday, Sears went to Boston on a forenoon train; when he returned shortly after 9:30 to the station, expecting to take the 9:30 train, he was informed that it had been postponed for that night until 11:15 to permit certain persons to attend some theater in Boston. Sears engaged a buggy and horse and drove out to Lynn. He brought this action for damages. He contended that their time tables, published daily in the paper, constituted offers that the trains would be run in that manner. By buying tickets, he had accepted their offer before it had been revoked.

The railway company admitted that the time tables contained offers in that regard, as claimed by Sears, but contended that they had withdrawn the offer for that particular day, because they had spread posters throughout the station that day, that the train would be postponed until 11:15 that evening. Sears contended that he did not see the posters.

Mr. Justice Chapman said: "If this action can be maintained, it must be for the breach of the contract with the company, made with Sears. He had purchased a package of tickets, entitling him to a passage in their cars from Boston to Lynn. This constituted a contract between the parties. The principal question is, What are the terms of the contract? The ticket does not express them all. The time tables published by the company and relied upon by the public in accepting their offers constitutes a part of this contract." These time tables, however, were offers which could be revoked at will by the company before an acceptance had been made. In this case, they were not revoked, said the Court, because the same publicity should have been given to the revocation as to the publication. They were published daily in a newspaper, but were revoked, only by hand bills.

The Court held that the railroad company was liable for the damages suffered by Sears due to the postponing of the train.

Ruling Law. Story Case Answer

When a man purchases a ticket from a railroad company, he thereby makes a contract with the company. But the ticket itself does not contain all the terms of the contract. The time tables, and schedule showing rates and charges also constitute a part of the offer of the company. When a person, then, purchases a ticket he accepts the offer of the railroad company to carry him safely, in accordance with its published time tables and rates. These time tables and published rates are merely offers, however, and may be withdrawn by the railroad at any time.

But, like any other offer, reasonable publication of their withdrawal must be made. If they are published by placards in the station, revocation in the same manner is sufficient. If the company publishes them in a newspaper, it is generally held that revocation must be made in the same manner. In the Story Case, the company had published certain rates; and this published rate was a part of the offer made to the public; Boardman tendered money for a ticket and thereby accepted the offer. The company could not relieve itself of liability on such a contract by saying that it was a mere invitation to bid. Judgment should be given for Boardman.

It should be added here that railroad companies usually protect themselves now by stipulation in the time tables governing the manner of withdrawal of trains and changes of time.