New Mexico Ex Rel. E. J. McLean & Co. v. Denver & Rio Grande Railroad
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM- THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF NEW MEXICO. The facts are stated in the opinion. Appellants agree with the Supreme Court of New Mexico that all legislation upon the subject of hid'e inspection in New Mexico, and the organization and existence of the Cattle Sanitary Board, should be looked into and construed together with this enactment, so far as the same may appear to be in ;pari materia.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM- THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF NEW MEXICO. The facts are stated in the opinion. Appellants agree with the Supreme Court of New Mexico that all legislation upon the subject of hid'e inspection in New Mexico, and the organization and existence of the Cattle Sanitary Board, should be looked into and construed together with this enactment, so far as the same may appear to be in ;pari materia. The statutes touching hide inspection directly or indirectly, are: Act of 1889, Comp. Laws, New Mexico, 1897, §§ 181-206, creating Cattle Sanitary Board, and see preamble creating it “for…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Day
This is an appeal from the judgment of the Supreme Court of New Mexico, affirming the judgment of the District Court of Santa Fé County,. sustaining a motion to quash an alternative writ of- mandamus issued on the relation of E. J. McLean & Company against the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad Company.
From the allegations of the writ it appears that the rela-tors, the appellants here, had delivered to the railroad company at Santa Fé, New Mexico, a bale of hides consigned to Denver, Colorado, a point on the line of the defendant’s railroad. . The railroad company refused to receive and ship the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. HaberSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. v. SolanSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Pennsylvania R. Co. v. HughesSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
- Patapsco Guano Co. v. North Carolina Board of AgricultureSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- McNeill v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1906
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by103 opinions
- Consolo v. Federal Maritime CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Savage v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- South Carolina State Highway Department v. Barnwell Bros.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Clark v. Paul Gray, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
98 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.