City of Chicago v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
1Dissent
Mr. Justice Harlan, whom Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Mr. Justice Burton join,
dissenting.
In my opinion the Court has acted prematurely in striking down this Chicago ordinance as it relates to Transfer. I accept the premise that the railroads have the right to choose whom they please to perform the transfer services, subject only to the City’s right to regulate how transfer vehicles shall be operated. Nevertheless, the validity of the ordinance should not be determined until Transfer has applied to Chicago for a “terminal” license and the local authorities have had an opportunity to act on the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Hines v. DavidowitzSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Public Serv. Comm'n of Utah v. Wycoff Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Spector Motor Service, Inc. v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Cooley v. Board of Wardens of Port of Philadelphia Ex Rel. Soc. for Relief of Distressed PilotsSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
- Alabama State Federation of Labor v. McAdorySupreme Court of the United States · 1945
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.