Attorney General v. Old Colony Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Two APPLICATIONS for a writ of mandamus to the Old Colony Railroad Company and the Boston and Albany Railroad Company, praying that the defendants be required to provide and sell mileage tickets conformably to the provisions of St. 1892, c. 389, to all persons applying therefor, and to redeem all such tickets, or any part thereof, on presentation by any other railroad corporation, and to accept and receive from all persons for fare and passage upon all their own lines all…
Read the full summary
Two APPLICATIONS for a writ of mandamus to the Old Colony Railroad Company and the Boston and Albany Railroad Company, praying that the defendants be required to provide and sell mileage tickets conformably to the provisions of St. 1892, c. 389, to all persons applying therefor, and to redeem all such tickets, or any part thereof, on presentation by any other railroad corporation, and to accept and receive from all persons for fare and passage upon all their own lines all such tickets issued by any other railroad corporation operating within the Commonwealth, and in all particulars to comply…
1Opinion of the CourtField, C. J.
The brief for the Old Colony Railroad Company raises the questions, whether the Attorney General has any right to bring the informations, and whether the court has any jurisdiction over the proceedings. It is said that St. 1892, c. 389, does not give the court equity jurisdiction to enforce its provisions. But we do not regard these informations as in-formations in equity. They are rather petitions for a writ of mandamus. See Pub. Sts. c, 186, § 13.
It concerns the public, or an indefinite portion of the public, whether railroad corporations not exempted or excluded by the railroad…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Munn v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Chicago & Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. WellmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Stone v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. MinnesotaSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Budd v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Pacific Telephone Etc. Co. v. EshlemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Attorney General v. WilliamsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1899
- Opinion of the Justices to the House of RepresentativesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
- City of Indianapolis v. NavinIndiana Supreme Court · 1897
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.