Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Railroad Commission

232 U.S. 338, 34 S. Ct. 438
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedFebruary 24, 1914
DocketNo. 186
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 232 U.S. 338 (Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Railroad Commission) 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
Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Railroad Commission, 232 U.S. 338, 34 S. Ct. 438 (1914).

Opinion

Mr, Chief Justice White

delivered the opinion of the court.

Appellant, a corporation organized under the laws of the United States, filed its bill in equity in the Circuit Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana to restrain the enforcement of an order of the Louisiana Railroad Commission fixing rates for the carriage of cotton-seed and its products, on the ground that the order exceeded the powers conferred upon the Commission by the state law, indeed, was so unreasonably low as to be a violation of the due process clause of the state constitution. After issue joined the testimony was heard by a special master who found for complainant. The Circuit Court on exceptions filed by respondents to the master’s report after reviewing the facts gave judgment sustaining the exceptions, setting aside the report and dismissing, the bill on the ground that the evidence did not support the master’s report — in other words, that the complainant had failed to prove its case. On appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals the evidence was again reviewed, and the judgment affirmed. (192 Fed. Rep. 280.) This appeal was then taken.

Both the courts below passed on the facts and agreed in holding that appellant failed to establish by the evidence its right to the relief demanded, and the rule is well settled that findings of fact concurred in by two lower courts will not be disturbed by this court unless shown to be clearly erroneous. Chicago Junction R. Co. v. King, 222 U. S. 222; Dun v. Lumbermen’s Credit Ass’n, 209 U. S. 20. As from an examination of the record we find no ground for concluding that there was plain error, the decree must be and is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Pick Manufacturing Co. v. General Motors Corp.
299 U.S. 3 (Supreme Court, 1936)
Vickery v. Yahola Sand & Gravel Co.
1932 OK 510 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1932)
Charleston Mining Co. v. United States
273 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 1927)
Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. City of Cleburne
269 U.S. 534 (Supreme Court, 1925)
Brewer-Elliott Oil & Gas Co. v. United States
260 U.S. 77 (Supreme Court, 1922)
Baker v. Schofield
243 U.S. 114 (Supreme Court, 1917)
Wright-Blodgett Co. v. United States
236 U.S. 397 (Supreme Court, 1915)
Gilson v. United States
234 U.S. 380 (Supreme Court, 1914)
Washington Securities Co. v. United States
234 U.S. 76 (Supreme Court, 1914)
Emerson & Norris Co. v. Simpson Bros.
214 F. 572 (First Circuit, 1914)
Tex. & Pac. Ry. v. Louisiana RR Comm.
232 U.S. 338 (Supreme Court, 1914)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
232 U.S. 338, 34 S. Ct. 438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/texas-pacific-railway-co-v-railroad-commission-scotus-1914.