Yazoo Mississippi Valley Railroad Company v. Jackson Vinegar Company
Decision Date | 02 December 1912 |
Docket Number | No. 57,57 |
Parties | YAZOO & MISSISSIPPI VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY, Plff. in Err., v. JACKSON VINEGAR COMPANY |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Messrs. Edward Mayes and Charles N. Burch for plaintiff in error.
Mr. William H. Watkins for defendant in error.
This was an action to recover damages from a railway company for the partial loss of a shipment of vinegar carried over the company's line from one point to another in the state of Mississippi. This case originated in a justice's court and was taken on appeal to the circuit court of Hinds county, where the plaintiff recovered a judgment for actual damages and $25 as a statutory penalty. That being the highest court in the state to which the case could be carried, it was then brought here. The position of the railway company, unsuccessfully taken in the state court and now renewed, is that the Mississippi statute providing for the penalty is repugnant to the due process of law and equal protection clauses of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The statute reads:
Laws 1908, 205, chap. 196.
The facts showing the application made of the statute are these: The plaintiff gave notice of its claim in the manner prescribed, placing its damages at $4.76, and, upon the railway company's failure to settle within sixty days, sued to recover that sum and the statutory penalty. Upon the trial the damages were assessed at the sum stated in the notice, and judgment was given therefor, with the penalty. Thus, the claim presented in advance of the suit, and which the railway company failed to settle within the time allotted, was fully sustained.
As applied to such a case, we think the statute is not repugnant to either the due...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State ex rel. Forman v. Wheatley
... ... 19502 Supreme Court of Mississippi March 19, 1917 ... [74 So. 428] ... short distance of the city of Jackson are very valuable on ... account of their ... Taxation (3 Ed.), 786; State Railroad Tax Cases, 92 U.S. 575, ... 609. Some of the ... 66; Y. & M. V. R ... R. Co. v. Vinegar Co., 226 U.S. 217; Hatch v ... Reardon, 204 ... 51 ... The ... Bi-Metallic Company v. State Board of Equalization case is ... the ... ...
-
Pate v. Bank of Newton
... ... OF NEWTON ET AL Supreme Court of Mississippi February 4, 1918 ... October, ... 551; ... Gardner v. Insurance Company (R. I.), 11 Am. Rep ... 238; Oliver Lee & ... 174; Y. & M. V. R. R. Co. v. Jackson ... Vinegar Co., 57 L.Ed. 193; R. R. Co. v ... Prince v. Lynch, 38 Cal. 528; Sonoma Valley Bank ... v. Hill, 59 Cal. 107; Young v ... 741; Selma and Marion Railroad ... Company v. Anderson, 51 Miss, 829; Flynn ... ...
-
Enochs v. State ex rel. Roberson
... ... 23312 Supreme Court of Mississippi October 8, 1923 ... (In ... Banc.) ... George Butler, Jackson, Miss., as an official appraiser, with ... 239; Adams ... v. Mortgage Company, 83 Miss. 397; Liverpool, etc., ... Co. v ... Note especially, Railroad Co. v ... Green, 216 U.S. 417, 54 L.Ed. 541; ... 748; Railroad Co. v. Jackson Vinegar ... Co. (Miss. case), 57 L.Ed. 193; Grenada ... ...
-
Milling Co v. Bondurant
...validity only when and so far as it is being or is about to be applied to his disadvantage. Yazoo & Mississippi R. R. Co. v. Jackson Vinegar Co., 226 U. S. 217, 33 Sup. Ct. 40, 57 L. Ed. 193; Jeffrey Manufacturing Co. v. Blagg, 235 U. S. 571, 576, 35 Sup. Ct. 167, 59 L. Ed. 364. Neither doe......
-
Unpacking Third-Party Standing.
...is not to be exercised with reference to hypothetical cases thus imagined."); Yazoo & Miss. Valley R.R. Co. v. Jackson Vinegar Co., 226 U.S. 217, 219 (1912) ("[T]his Court must deal with the case in hand and not with imaginary (256.) See generally Dorf, supra note 17, at 251-64 (canvass......