405 Ill. 528 (1950) 91 N.E.2d 88 HYMAN J. BERG, doing business as BERG TRUCK AND PARTS COMPANY, Appellant, v. SAMUEL SCHREIBER et al., doing business as SCHREIBER TRUCKING CO., Appellees. No. 31203. Supreme Court of Illinois. Opinion filed March 22, 1950. Rehearing denied May 15, 1950. *529 DIRECTOR & LIEBENSON, of Chicago, (HAROLD A. LIEBENSON, of counsel,) for appellant. DEMPSEY, MILLS & CASEY, of Chicago, (JOHN W. MILLS, of counsel,) for appellees. Judgment affirmed. Mr. JUSTICE GUNN delivered the opinion of the court: Hyman J. Berg, doing business as Berg Truck and Parts Company, brought suit against Samuel Schreiber and Harry Schreiber, doing business as Schreiber Trucking Co., for damages to certain merchandise while in transit in interstate commerce from Butler, Pennsylvania, to Chicago, Illinois. Plaintiff obtained a judgment for $3216.83 in the superior court of Cook County, which was reversed by the Appellate Court. We have allowed an appeal to this court. The facts show that plaintiff purchased a shipment of jeep parts in Butler, Pennsylvania, to be delivered in Chicago via defendant's truck lines. The defendants were common carriers, and had an approved tariff schedule of rates on file, and also a uniform bill of lading approved by the Interstate Commerce Commission, and thereby became bound by such schedule and provisions of the bill of lading. The parts were delivered in a damaged condition. There was no written claim or demand presented to the defendants prior to the commencement of the suit. It appears before the suit was brought, after the defendants were notified of the damaged condition of the shipment, an insurance adjuster for the defendants made a list of the damaged parts, with the assistance of one of plaintiff's men, and such list was given to the plaintiff by the adjuster. It also appears, without dispute, that the defendants' adjuster requested the plaintiff to file a written proof *530 of loss on forms provided for that purpose, and that such adjuster refused to make any commitment as to payment until such written proof had been received. No written claim was made, and it was argued that the list of damaged parts furnished by the defendants' adjuster to the plaintiff, and a copy of which was given back to the plaintiff, complied with the provisions of the law. The exact form of this list is necessary to properly determine whether the plaintiff had complied with the Interstate Commerce Commission regulations. Abbreviated, it is in the following form: "SUMMARY OF SHIPMENT VIA SCHRIEBER TRUCKING CO. AUGUST 17, 1945 DELIVERED ACCOUNTED INVOICED ITEMS GOOD REJECTED FOR CONDITION 180 Air Cleaner Fillers 139 86 (22) 225 26 Fly Wheels 27 27" There are dozens of other parts mentioned as rejected in the same manner, which is said to constitute a claim in writing in compliance with the Interstate Commerce Commission Act, and the conditions set out upon the uniform bill of lading required under it. In the instant case the defendants did not issue a bill of lading for …
Original document ES