Southern Pacific Co. v. Darnell-Taenzer Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. The case is stated in the opinion. in support of the proposition that a party seeking to recover an excessive rate must prove that he bore the burden of the excess, cited Parsons v. Chicago & Northwestern Ry. Co., 167 U. S. 447; Pennsylvania R. R. Co. v. International Coal Mining Co., 230 U. S. 184; and Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Spiller, 246 Fed.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. The case is stated in the opinion. in support of the proposition that a party seeking to recover an excessive rate must prove that he bore the burden of the excess, cited Parsons v. Chicago & Northwestern Ry. Co., 167 U. S. 447; Pennsylvania R. R. Co. v. International Coal Mining Co., 230 U. S. 184; and Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Spiller, 246 Fed. Rep. 1; and distinguished Meeker v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co., 236 U. S. 429; and Mills v. Lehigh Valley R. R. Co., 238 U. S. 473. moved to dismiss because no one of the many separate…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Holmes
This is a suit brought by the defendants in error to ■recover reparation from the railroads for charging a rate on hardwood lumber, alleged to be excessive. The Interstate Commerce Commission had found the rate to be excessive and had made an order for reduction from 85 to 75 cents, which was obeyed, and also one for reparation to the extent of the excess, which was not obeyed. 13 I. C. C. 668. A demurrer to the declaration was sustained by the Circuit Court on the ground that it was not alleged that the plaintiffs had paid the excessive rates or that they were damaged thereby. 190 Fed. Rep.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. International Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Meeker & Co. v. Lehigh Valley RRSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Mills v. Lehigh Valley RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Darnell-Taenzer Lumber Co. v. Southern Pac. Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1915
3Cited by183 opinions
- Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of CarpentersSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Keogh v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Hemi Group, LLC v. City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
178 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.