Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. City of Louisville
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western Kentucky
In Equity. Suit by the Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Company against the City of Louisville.
1Opinion of the Court
EVANS, District Judge.
The complainant, which we shall call the company, in February, 1909, was charging the following rates for services in the city of Louisville:
Business.
■Within the two mile radius of nearest exchange.
Private metallic...........................................$8.00 per month
2-station metallic......................................... 5.00 “ “
Public pay station (coin device) private.................... 4.00 “ “
(Agent's service free out and in, and divide with any cash deposits for local city calls.)
City and county telephones within city limits...............4.00 “ "
Residence.
P…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Smyth v. AmesSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Reagan v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Smyth v. Ames; Smyth v. Smith; Smyth v. HigginsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Willcox v. Consolidated Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- City of Knoxville v. Knoxville Water Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Scranton-Spring Brook Water Service Co. v. Public Service CommissionSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1934
- Brooklyn Union Gas Co. v. PrendergastDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1925
- City of Norfolk v. Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1937
- Graham County Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Town of SaffordArizona Supreme Court · 1958
- Downers Grove Community High School District No. 99 v. Board of EducationAppellate Court of Illinois · 1946
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.