Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Kelly
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Tennessee. This was an action to recover statutory penalties under chapter 60, § 11, p. 122, Acts Tenn. 1885. That act is one granting certain privileges to telegraph and telephone companies “and prohibiting discrimination between patrons.”
Read the full summary
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Tennessee. This was an action to recover statutory penalties under chapter 60, § 11, p. 122, Acts Tenn. 1885. That act is one granting certain privileges to telegraph and telephone companies “and prohibiting discrimination between patrons.” The eleventh section is in these words: “Every telephone company doing business within this state, and engaged in a general telephone business, shall supply all applicants for telephone connection and facilities without discrimination or partiality, provided such applicants…
1Opinion of the CourtLurton, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The analogy between the principle which determines the duties and responsibilities of telephone and telegraph companies and those which apply to common carriers of goods and persons is so strong that it is often said of them that they are “common carriers of news.” The description is more applicable to telegraph companies than to telephone companies, for the one receives and sends a message, the other merely supplies the facilities by which the user may extend the compass of his own voice. Nevertheless, both telephone and telegraph companies are engaged in…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Church of the Holy Trinity v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- United States v. KirbySupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Budd v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Chew Heong v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Bate Refrigerating Co. v. SulzbergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Miller v. Standard Nut Margarine Co. of Fla.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Trustees of Jennie DePauw Memorial Methodist Episcopal Church v. New Albany Water WorksIndiana Supreme Court · 1923
- Thummess v. Von HoffmanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1940
- Goodman v. CarrollSupreme Court of Alabama · 1921
- Home Telephone Co. v. People's Telephone & Telegraph Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1911
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.