Legal Opinion · Concurrence

National Carloading Corporation v. United States

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided February 10, 1955No. 11898_1Published

1ConcurrenceDanaher, Circuit Judge

I do not agree that the statute ipso facto entitled the Government to the reduced rate “regardless of how transportation is arranged.” My colleagues decide the question without reference to the shipping documents while I believe that without them the freight forwarder might have been entitled to recover. There is no question — indeed it is here conceded — that had the goods been tendered directly to the railroad, land grant rates would apply. “All of the reported cases of which we are advised involve a dispute between the government and a carrier as to the application of such rates.”1

The…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad v. Acme Fast Freight, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Alcoa Steamship Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  3. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  4. Southern Pacific Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  5. United States v. PowellSupreme Court of the United States · 1947

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

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

Powered by the Exa API