Southern Railway Company, Plff. In Err. v. Burlington Lumber Company
Administrative Proceeding Supreme Court of the United States, Case No. 236

Tags No tags have been applied so far. Sign in to add some.
Request Update Request UpdateSpaceE-Mail Alert Get E-Mail Alerts

Space Space

  Text Tab Overlap Citations (2) Tab Overlap Cited By (15) Right End

225 U.S. 99

32 S.Ct. 657

56 L.Ed. 1001


No. 236.

Argued and submitted May 3, 1912.

Decided May 27, 1912.

Messrs. John K. Graves and Alfred P. Thom for plaintiff in error.

Messrs. Lee S. Overman and W. H. Carroll for defendant in error.

Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the court:


This is an action to recover penalties under a statute of North Carolina for refusal to receive goods for shipment. As the statute is the same that was held bad, so far as it concerns commerce among the states, in Southern R. Co. v. Reid, 222 U. S. 424, 56 L. ed. 257, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 140, and Southern R. Co. v. Reid, 222 U. S. 444, 56 L. ed. 263, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 145, a short statement will be enough. On January 26, 1907, the Burlington Lumber Company tendered to the railway company at Burlington, North Carolina, certain machinery for shipment to Saginaw, Michigan, on a through bill of lading. Saginaw was not on the railway company's line, the company had no rates to Saginaw, and the agent had to delay in order to inquire of his superiors. The result was that the through bill of lading was not issued until April 3. The suit, as we have said, is for the penalty, and nothing else. The supreme court of the state decided against the railway on the same ground that it did in the decisions already reversed. In the circumstances it seems unnecessary to discuss the case more at length.


Judgment reversed.


This case has been viewed 77 times.

No comments have been added yet. Sign in to post a comment.
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
Sign Up
Need Password Help?