Legal Opinion

Codd v. McGoldrick Lumber Co.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided May 7, 1928No. 5154PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGivens, J.

Petitioners and plaintiffs seek a writ of mandate compelling defendant company to operate its logging railroad as a common carrier of lumber, logs and lumber products, the only service in issue. The essential question is whether defendant is a common carrier or public utility. Hence, while the matter in the affidavit or petition referred to in subds. (a) and (d), p. 2, of defendant’s motion to strike as irrelevant, is perhaps not essential to the cause of action stated, it has some relevancy to the representations as to its future operations alleged to have been made by the defendant before…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Frost & Frost Trucking Co. v. Railroad Comm'n of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Michigan Public Utilities Commission v. DukeSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  3. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. United States Ex Rel. Pitcairn Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1910
  4. Tap Line CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  5. State ex rel. Ellis v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of Florida · 1907

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. HixIdaho Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Codd v. McGoldrick Lumber Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1929

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API