Hooker v. Knapp

225 U.S. 302, 32 S. Ct. 769, 56 L. Ed. 1099, 1912 U.S. LEXIS 2088
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedJune 7, 1912
DocketNos. 773 and 774
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 225 U.S. 302 (Hooker v. Knapp) 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
Hooker v. Knapp, 225 U.S. 302, 32 S. Ct. 769, 56 L. Ed. 1099, 1912 U.S. LEXIS 2088 (1912).

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice White

delivered the opinion of the court.

The appellants in these cases originally applied to the Interstate Commerce Commission for reduction of the maximum rates between Cincinnati and Chattanooga from the 76 c. schedule to a 60 c. schedule. The Commission refused to make the full extent of this reduction. Thereupon the respective parties filed bills in the Commerce Court demanding that the Commission’s order be “suspended, set aside, annulled, and declared void and of no effect” and that the individual defendants and the Commission be required by mandatory injunction to set aside and annul the said order, that the case be reopened, and the complainants given further relief. The two bills were consolidated. The individual defendants, the Commission, and the Railroad Company all demurred to the bill on the merits. ■ The United States moved to dismiss on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction. The court took jurisdiction, but dismissed on the merits. These appeals were then prosecuted. The cases are, in all respects, controlled by the opinion announced and ruling made in the Procter & Gamble Case, this day de *306 cided (ante, p. 282) and for the reasons in that case stated, these cases must be and are remanded, with directions to dismiss for want of jurisdiction, and

It is so ordered.

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

Related

Rochester Telephone Corp. v. United States
307 U.S. 125 (Supreme Court, 1939)
Crancer v. United States
305 U.S. 567 (Supreme Court, 1938)
Diamond Tank Transport, Inc. v. United States
305 U.S. 567 (Supreme Court, 1938)
Crancer v. United States
23 F. Supp. 690 (E.D. Missouri, 1938)
Diamond Tank Transport, Inc. v. United States
23 F. Supp. 497 (W.D. Washington, 1938)
Shannahan v. United States
303 U.S. 596 (Supreme Court, 1938)
United States v. Griffin
303 U.S. 226 (Supreme Court, 1938)
George Allison & Co. v. United States
12 F. Supp. 862 (S.D. New York, 1935)
Inghram v. Union Stock Yards Co.
5 F. Supp. 486 (D. Nebraska, 1933)
Alton Railroad v. United States
287 U.S. 229 (Supreme Court, 1932)
United States v. Los Angeles & Salt Lake Railroad
273 U.S. 299 (Supreme Court, 1927)
United States v. New River Co.
265 U.S. 533 (Supreme Court, 1924)
The Chicago Junction Case
264 U.S. 258 (Supreme Court, 1924)
McLean Lumber Co. v. United States
237 F. 460 (E.D. Tennessee, 1916)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
225 U.S. 302, 32 S. Ct. 769, 56 L. Ed. 1099, 1912 U.S. LEXIS 2088, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hooker-v-knapp-scotus-1912.