Chicago, Milwaukee St Paul Railway Company v. Polt
| Decision Date | 26 January 1914 |
| Docket Number | No. 161,161 |
| Parties | CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, & ST. PAUL RAILWAY COMPANY, Plff. in Err., v. J. F. POLT |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. William G. Porter, Burton Hanson, Ed. L. Grantham, and Harrison C. Preston for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from page 166 intentionally omitted] No appearance for defendant in error.
This was a suit against the plaintiff in error for loss of property destroyed by fire communicated from its locomotive engine. A statute of South Dakota, after making the railroad company absolutely responsible in such cases, goes on to make it liable for double the amount of damage actually sustained unless it pays the full amount within sixty days from notice. If, within sixty days, it shall 'ofter in writing to pay a fixed sum, being the full amount of the damages sustained, and the owner shall refuse to accept the same, then in any action thereafter brought for such damages, when such owner recovers a less sum as damages than the amount so offered, then such owner shall recover only his damages, and the railway company shall recover its costs.' S. D. Laws 1907, chap. 215. The plaintiff got a verdict for $780. The railroad had offered $500; less, that is, than the amount of the verdict, while the plaintiff, on the other hand, demanded more. In his demand, his declaration, and his testimony, he set the damage at $838.20. A judgment for double damages was affirmed by the supreme court of the state. 26 S. D. 378, 128 N. W. 472.
The defendant in error presented no argument, probably because he realized that under the recent decisions of this court the judgment could not be sustained. No doubt the states have a large latitude in the policy that they will pursue and enforce, but the rudiments of fair play required by the 14th Amendment are wanting when a defendant is required to guess rightly what a jury will find, or pay double if that body sees fit to add 1 cent to the amount that was tendered, although the tender was obviously futile because of an excessive demand. The case is covered by St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. Wynne, 224 U. S. 354, 56 L. ed. 799, 42 L.R.A.(N.S.) 102, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 493. It is not like those in which a moderate penalty is imposed for failure to satisfy a demand found to be just. Yazoo & M. Valley R. Co. v. Jackson Vinegar Co. 226 U. S. 217, 57 L. ed. 193, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 40.
Judgment...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
General Elec. Co. v. Jackson
...See GE's Memorandum in Opposition to EPA's Summary Judgment Motion ("GE Opp.") at 46 n.29 (citing Chicago, M. & St. P. Rwy. Co. v. Polt, 232 U.S. 165, 167-68, 34 S.Ct. 301, 58 L.Ed. 554 (1914); Missouri Pac. Rwy. Co. v. Tucker, 230 U.S. 340, 346-51, 33 S.Ct. 961, 57 L.Ed. 1507 (1913); Misso......
-
Dutton Phosphate Co. v. Priest
... ... Priest against the Dutton Phosphate Company, a ... corporation. Judgment for plaintiff, and ... 322, 33 S.Ct ... 833, 57 L.Ed. 1206; Chicago Dock & Canal Co. v ... Fraley, 228 U.S. 680, 33 ... 575; St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway ... Company v. Newman, 94 Ark. 458, 127 S.W ... stated in Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. Polt, 232 ... U.S. 165, 34 S.Ct. 301, 58 L.Ed. 554, ... ...
-
Bethlehem Steel Co. v. National Labor R. Board
...88, 33 S.Ct. 185, 57 L. Ed. 431. The right to such a hearing is one of `the rudiments of fair play' (Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. Polt, 232 U.S. 165, 168, 34 S.Ct. 301, 58 L. Ed. 554) assured to every litigant by the Fourteenth Amendment as a minimal requirement. West Ohio Gas Co. v. Pub......
-
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. INDUSTRIAL COM'N
...v. Louisville & N. R. Co., supra. The right to such a hearing is one of `the rudiments of fair play' (Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. Polt, 232 U.S. 165, 168, 34 S.Ct. 301, 58 L.Ed. 554) assured to every litigant by the Fourteenth Amendment as a minimal requirement. West Ohio Gas Co. v. Pub......
-
How Many Times Was Lochner-era Substantive Due Process Effective? - Michael J. Phillips
...liquidated damages provision for violating rate schedule for shipping petroleum products); Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. v. Polt, 232 U.S. 165, 167-68 (1914) (same general type of statute at issue in Wynne); Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. v. Kennedy, 232 U.S. 626,627 (1914) (followin......