Los Angeles Switching Case
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE COMMERCE COURT. The facts, which involve the validity of an order of the Interstate Commerce Commission in regard to switching charges within the yard limits of Los Angeles, California; are stated in the opinion.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE COMMERCE COURT. The facts, which involve the validity of an order of the Interstate Commerce Commission in regard to switching charges within the yard limits of Los Angeles, California; are stated in the opinion. The action of the Commerce Court in refusing to sustain the motions of the United States to dismiss the bills, and in holding, on the face of the bills alone, that the court had the power to decide, notwithstanding the findings of the Commission based on the evidence, that the service of making deliveries on the spur tracks was different from the service of making…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hughes
The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company, the Southern Pacific Company and the San Pedro, Los Angeles and Salt Lake Railroad Company, brought this suit against the Interstate Commerce Commission in the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Kansas, first division, to restrain the enforcement of an order of the Commission made in April, 1910. The order required these companies to desist 'from exacting their present charge of $2.50 per car for delivering and receiving carload freight to and from industries located upon spurs and sidetracks within their respective…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MottleySupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Interstate Commerce Commission v. Louisville & Nashville RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Interstate Commerce Commission v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Philadelphia, Baltimore & Washington Railroad v. SchubertSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. United States Ex Rel. Pitcairn Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1910
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by79 opinions
- Keogh v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Square D Co. v. Niagara Frontier Tariff Bureau, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Skinner & Eddy Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Texas & Pac. Ry. v. Gulf, Etc., Ry.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
74 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.