Southern Pac. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission

188 F. 241, 1911 U.S. Commerce Ct. LEXIS 15
Commerce Court·Decided July 20, 1911·No. No. 1·Published

Opinion

GARLAND, Judge.

The bill in this case was filed for the same purpose as the bill in case No. 2, Atchison, Topeka & Santa F6 Railway Co. Southern Pacific Co., and San Pedro, Dos Angeles & Salt Lake Railroad Co., v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States, 188 Fed. 229, except that the switching service for which a charge is claimed is performed at the city of San Francisco, Cal.

For the reasons stated in the opinion filed in case No. 2, above mentioned, the motion for a temporary injunction made by the petitioners is granted, and the motion to dismiss made by the United States and the Interstate Commerce Commission is denied.

MACK, Judge, dissenting. See 188 Fed. 929.

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

Southern Pac. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 188 F. 241, 1911 U.S. Commerce Ct. LEXIS 15 (Colo. 1911).

188 F. 241 (Southern Pac. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related