Louisiana & P. Ry. Co. v. United States
Commerce Court
Petitions by the Louisiana & Pacific Railway Company and others against the United States and others, the Woodworth & Louisiana Central Railway Company, Limited, and others, against the same, the Mansfield Railway & Transportation Company and others against the same, and the Victoria, Fisher & Western Railroad Company and others against the same, to set aside orders of the Interstate Commerce Commission; the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Railroad Commission 'of…
Read the full summary
Petitions by the Louisiana & Pacific Railway Company and others against the United States and others, the Woodworth & Louisiana Central Railway Company, Limited, and others, against the same, the Mansfield Railway & Transportation Company and others against the same, and the Victoria, Fisher & Western Railroad Company and others against the same, to set aside orders of the Interstate Commerce Commission; the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Railroad Commission 'of Louisiana, the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fé Railway Company, and the Gulf, Colorado & Santa Fé Railway Company, interveners.
1Opinion of the Court
MACK, Judge.
Following the supplemental report of the Interstate Commerce Commission in Star Grain & Lumber Co. v. A., T. & S. F. Railroad, 14 Interst. Com. Com’n R. 364, 17 Interst. Com. Com’n R. 338, in which the Commission, while entering no formal order, condemned the making of allowances and divisions to tap lines for the traffic of proprietary mills, the trunk lines filed with the Commission cancellations of the tariffs which had provided for joint rates with the several petitioners herein. Thereupon the Mansfield Railway & Transportation Company and others filed complaints requesting…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Interstate Commerce Commission v. Union Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Santa Fe, Prescott & Phœnix Railway Co. v. Grant Bros. Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Interstate Commerce Commission v. Alabama Midland Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission. Interstate Commerce Commission v. Cincinnati. N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Procter & Gamble Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- United States Ex Rel. De Lucia v. O'donovan, MarshalCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1950
- Baltimore & OR Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1934
- Denver & Salt Lake Railroad v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Colorado · 1918
- Louisville & N. R. v. United StatesDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 1914
- Inghram v. Union Stock Yards Co.District Court, D. Nebraska · 1933
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.