South & N. A. R. v. Railroad Commission of Alabama
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Middle Alabama
In Equity. These cases are submitted on excéptions for impertinence to the first and second supplemental bills. The nature of the exceptions will readily be gathered from the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
JONES, District Judge.
The motion of complainants to strike respondents’ exceptions to portions of the first and second supplemental hills for impertinence cannot prevail. An examination of the record shows that, at the date of the order suspending further proceedings until the decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals upon the interlocutory injunctions, no rule day had .passed after the service of process, at which the exceptions were required to be presented; and, under the circumstances attending the preparation of these cases, the court does not feel at liberty to hold the respondents in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Yick Wo v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Church of the Holy Trinity v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Covington & Lexington Turnpike Road Co. v. SandfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Blake v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Louisville & N. R. v. Railroad Commission of AlabamaDistrict Court, M.D. Alabama · 1913
- Newport Poster Advertising Co. v. WheelerSuperior Court of Rhode Island · 1931