Spence v. Southern Ry. Co.

85 S.E. 1058, 101 S.C. 436, 1915 S.C. LEXIS 151
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedAugust 12, 1915
Docket9157
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 85 S.E. 1058 (Spence v. Southern Ry. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Spence v. Southern Ry. Co., 85 S.E. 1058, 101 S.C. 436, 1915 S.C. LEXIS 151 (S.C. 1915).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Hydrick.

Plaintiff, recovered judgment in a magistrate’s Court for $6.20, an admitted overcharge in the rate on an interstate shipment, and $50.00, the penalty provided by statute (Civil Code 1912, vol. I, sec. 2573) for failure to pay the claim therefor within the time prescribed. The Circuit Court affirmed the judgment.

Since the trial on Circuit the Supreme Court of the United States has held that the penalty statute is void as applied to interstate commerce. Charleston & W. C. Ry. Co. v. Varnville Furniture Co., 237 U. S. 597; 35 Sup. Ct. *437 715; 100 S. C. 227a. The penalty must, therefore, be remitted. If this is done within twenty days after notice of the filing of the remittitur, the judgment will stand affirmed; otherwise a new trial is ordered.

Reversed nisi.

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

Related

Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Sandlin
78 So. 667 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1918)
Erisman v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad
180 Iowa 759 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
85 S.E. 1058, 101 S.C. 436, 1915 S.C. LEXIS 151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spence-v-southern-ry-co-sc-1915.