Chicago, Milwaukee St Paul Railway Company v. State of Iowa
Decision Date | 13 April 1914 |
Docket Number | No. 176,176 |
Citation | 58 L.Ed. 988,34 S.Ct. 592,233 U.S. 334 |
Parties | CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, & ST. PAUL RAILWAY COMPANY, Plff. in Err., v. STATE OF IOWA |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. O. W. Dynes, C. S. Jefferson, and Burton Hanson for plaintiff in error.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 335-337 intentionally omitted] Mr. George Cosson, Attorney General of Iowa, and Mr. Henry E. Sampson for appellee.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 337-339 intentionally omitted] Mr. Justice Hughes delivered the opinion of the court:
This suit was brought by the state of Iowa to obtain a mandatory injunction requiring the Chicago, Milwaukee, & St. Paul Railway Company to comply with an order of the State Railroad Commission promulgated December 22, 1909. The defendant answered, denying the validity of the order, and also filed a cross petition to set it aside, alleging that it was repugnant to the Constitution of the United States, as an attempt to regulate interstate commerce and to deprive the company of its property without due process of law, and, further, that the Commission was without authority under the laws of the state to make the order. Judgment, sustaining the action of the Commission and directing compliance, was affirmed by the supreme court of the state. 152 Iowa, 317, 130 N. W. 802.
It appeared that the railway company, in 1909, had refused to accept shipments of coal in carload lots at Davenport, Iowa, for points in that state when tendered in cars of other railroad companies by which the coal had been brought to Davenport from points in Illinois. The railway company insisted that it was entitled to furnish its own cars. The Clark Coal & Coke Company, operating a branch at Davenport, complained of this rule to the Railroad Commission, stating that it was a departure from the practice which had obtained for several years with respect to such shipments, that the Clark Company paid all charges to Davenport, and on receiving orders from its customers tendered written billing for transportation from Davenport to the designated points, and that it was unreasonable for the railway company to require in such cases that the coal should be unloaded and reloaded in its own cars. A hearing was had before the Commission at which other shippers intervened, adopting the coal company's complaint. The facts were presented in an agreed statement, as follows:
Thereupon, the Commission rendered a decision in favor of the shipper and entered the following order, to which this controversy relates:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Delaware Co v. Town of Morristown 1928
...Coast Line R. R. Co. v. Corporation Commission, 206 U. S. 1, 21, 22, 27 S. Ct. 585, 51 L. Ed. 933; Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co. v. Iowa, 233 U. S. 334, 34 S. Ct. 592, 58 L. Ed. 988; Michigan Central R. R. Co. v. Railroad Commission, 236 U. S. 615, 35 S. Ct. 422, 59 L. Ed. 750; Chic......
-
Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co. v. Northern Oklahoma Rys.
...It is beyond the power of the shipper (Browning v. Waycross, 233 U. S. 16, 34 S. Ct. 578, 58 L. Ed. 828; C., M. & St. P. Ry. v. Iowa, 233 U. S. 334, 343, 34 S. Ct. 592, 58 L. Ed. 988) or of the carrier (B. & O. S. W. R. R. Co. v. Settle, 260 U. S. 166, 170, 43 S. Ct. 28, 67 L. Ed. 189; Baer......
-
State v. Continental Oil Co.
...U.S. 665, 33 S.Ct. 712, 57 L.Ed. 1015; Bacon v. Illinois, 227 U.S. 504, 33 S.Ct. 299, 57 L.Ed. 615; and Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. v. Iowa, 233 U.S. 334, 34 S.Ct. 592, 58 L.Ed. 988. The determination of the interstate commerce commission that the handling of the gasoline at the tank farm ......
-
State v. Phillips Pipe Line Co.
...remains essentially a local function of intrastate commerce and cannot be changed by the mere form of contract. Chicago, M. & St. Ry. Co. v. Iowa, 233 U.S. 334, 58 L. Ed. 988. (f) The building, maintaining, renting and repairing of houses, the production and distribution for domestic purpos......