Kidder v. Fitchburg Railroad
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Bill in equity, filed in the Superior Court, under St. 1894, c. 469, to compel the defendant corporation to furnish the plaintiffs, who were engaged in a local express business, with terms, facilities, and accommodations similar to those provided by the corporation for other express companies doing business upon the defendant’s railroad. The case was heard by Bishop, J., and reported for the determination of this court.
Read the full summary
Bill in equity, filed in the Superior Court, under St. 1894, c. 469, to compel the defendant corporation to furnish the plaintiffs, who were engaged in a local express business, with terms, facilities, and accommodations similar to those provided by the corporation for other express companies doing business upon the defendant’s railroad. The case was heard by Bishop, J., and reported for the determination of this court. If the plaintiffs were entitled to relief, a mandatory injunction was to issue; otherwise, the bill was to be dismissed, or such other decree entered as law and justice might…
1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.
This suit in equity is brought under the provisions of St. 1894, c. 469, to compel the defendant to give the plaintiffs terms, facilities, and accommodations for the transportation of merchandise as a local express company equal to those given to another express company now doing business over the defendant’s railroad.
The Pub. Sts. c. 112, § 188, is in these words: “Every railroad corporation shall give to all persons or companies reason-. able and equal terms, facilities, and accommodations for the transportation of themselves, their agents and servants, and of any merchandise and other…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Old Colony Railroad v. TrippMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Cook & Wheeler v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- Sloan v. Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
- Root v. Long Island RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
3Cited by1 opinion
- Trinity & B. v. Ry. Co. v. Empire Express Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1914