Foster Lumber Co. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from J ackson Circuit Court. — Hon. W. A. Thomas, Judge. (1) The alleged agreement or arrangement by which the railway companies were to pay to the lumber company one-half of their proportion of the interstate freight charges on the shipments in question, constitutes one of the devices prohibited by the Interstate Commerce Act, and by reason thereof, the claim herein sued upon is void, illegal and unenforcihle, and plaintiff cannot, therefore, recover in this case.
Read the full summary
Appeal from J ackson Circuit Court. — Hon. W. A. Thomas, Judge. (1) The alleged agreement or arrangement by which the railway companies were to pay to the lumber company one-half of their proportion of the interstate freight charges on the shipments in question, constitutes one of the devices prohibited by the Interstate Commerce Act, and by reason thereof, the claim herein sued upon is void, illegal and unenforcihle, and plaintiff cannot, therefore, recover in this case. Intertsate Commerce Act, Act of Congress, February 4,1887 (24 Stat. L. 379), as amended by Act of March 4, 1889 (25 Stat.…
1Opinion of the Court
WHITE, C.
— The suit is for damages for breach of contract.
The plaintiff obtained judgment in the circuit court of Jackson County for the sum of $4572.54, and after an appeal to the Kansas City Court of Appeals the cause was transferred to this court on motion of the appellants on the ground that the construction of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and of section 30, article 2, of the Constitution of Missouri, was involved.
Plaintiff was a corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of lumber, with headquarters at Houston, in the State of Texas. The…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad v. Interstate Commerce CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- United States v. Union Stock Yard & Transit Co. of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Int. Comm. Comm. v. DEL., L. & WRRSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Union Pacific Railway Co. v. GoodridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. FrenchSupreme Court of Missouri · 1900
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Southwestern Lumber Co. of New Jersey v. KerrDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1934
- Mangelsdorf Seed Co. v. Missouri Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Kansas · 1929