United States v. Metropolitan Lumber Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
The Metropolitan Rumher Company and another, the Southern Rumber Company and another, the Franklin Rumber Company, the Boynton Rumber Company, Ira R. Crouse, and Perrine & Buckelew, Incorporated, were severally indicted for alleged violations of Act Feb. 19, 1903, c. 708, § 1, as amended by Act June 29, 1906, c. 3591. On demurrers to the indictments.
1Opinion of the Court
HAIGHT, District Judge,.
As the indictments in these cases are in all material respects the same, as are also the questions which the demurrers to each raise (at least so far as the points relied upon at the argument are concerned), the demurrers were argued together, and the decision herein announced will apply to all of the cases. The indictments are based on alleged violations of section 1 of the Act of February 19, 1903, c. 708, 32 Stat. 847, commonly known as the El-kins Act, as the same was amended by the Act of June 29, 1906, c. 3591, § 2, 34 Stat. 587, commonly known as the Hepburn Act…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. MottleySupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Armour Packing Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. CarlSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. HarrimanSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Chicago & North Western Railway Co. v. Union Packing Co.District Court, D. Nebraska · 1974
- United States Railroad Administration v. Hilton Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- Holt Motor Co. v. Nicholson Universal S. S. Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1944
- United States v. P. Koenig Coal Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1924
- United States v. AltmanDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1934
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.