Davis v. Currie

Supreme Court

Davis v. Currie

266 U.S. 182, 45 S. Ct. 88, 69 L. Ed. 234, 1924 U.S. LEXIS 2910

CourtSupreme Court of the United States

DecidedNovember 17, 1924

Docket60

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 266 U.S. 182 (Davis v. Currie) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Davis v. Currie, 266 U.S. 182, 45 S. Ct. 88, 69 L. Ed. 234, 1924 U.S. LEXIS 2910 (1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Mb. Justice McReynolds

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This writ must be dismissed. The petition therefor declared — The sole question presented is, “ Can damages for humiliation and wounded feelings be awarded the respondent against the petitioner, the United States Railroad Administration, under the provisions of the Federal Control Act, the proclamations of the President and the general orders of the Director General pursuant thereto? ”

At the hearing counsel relied on the following: “ The judgment against the Director General of Railroads for wounded feelings and humiliation arising out of a wanton, willful and malicious act of his servant is unauthorized, involving, essentially, the infliction of a penalty upon the Government.” The argument was that although the trial court distinctly limited the jury to actual damages, nevertheless, it necessarily follows from the size of the verdict that punitive damages were assessed against and a penalty was imposed upon the United States.

The petition did not state the case presented at the bar.

Dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Mb. Justice McReynolds

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This writ must be dismissed. The petition therefor declared — The sole question presented is, “ Can damages for humiliation and wounded feelings be awarded the respondent against the petitioner, the United States Railroad Administration, under the provisions of the Federal Control Act, the proclamations of the President and the general orders of the Director General pursuant thereto? ”

At the hearing counsel relied on the following: “ The judgment against the Director General of Railroads for wounded feelings and humiliation arising out of a wanton, willful and malicious act of his servant is unauthorized, involving, essentially, the infliction of a penalty upon the Government.” The argument was that although the trial court distinctly limited the jury to actual damages, nevertheless, it necessarily follows from the size of the verdict that punitive damages were assessed against and a penalty was imposed upon the United States.

The petition did not state the case presented at the bar.

Dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 U.S. 182, 45 S. Ct. 88, 69 L. Ed. 234, 1924 U.S. LEXIS 2910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-currie-scotus-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack