Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hall v. Bowers

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided November 23, 1928No. 26171Published

1Dissent

Thompson and Eberly, JJ.,

dissenting.

While we join in the conclusions reached by Shepherd, District Judge, in his dissent, it might be well to further suggest that this court should take judicial notice that the Missouri Pacific Railroad (involved herein) is one engaged in interstate commerce, and hence the federal laws, as well as those of our state, must have consideration and be permitted to function in determining the question of illegal discrimination. Such federal laws have been construed in the following cases: United States v. Vacuum Oil Co., 153 Fed. 598; Hocking Valley R. Co. v.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hocking Valley Ry. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
  2. United States v. P. Koenig Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  3. United States v. Vacuum Oil Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 1907
  4. Armour Packing Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1907

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

Powered by the Exa API