Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Davis Vs. Currie

Davis vs Currie

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Nov-17-1924
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/94034

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
266 U.S. 182
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Davis

Respondent

Currie

Excerpt

davis v. currie - 266 u.s. 182 (1924) u.s. supreme court davis v. currie, 266 u.s. 182 (1924) davis v. currie no. 60 argued october 10, 1924 decided november 17, 1924 266 u.s. 182 certiorari to the supreme court of the state of south carolina syllabus a writ of certiorari will be dismissed if the case as relied on by the petitioner in argument is not the case as presented in the petition for the writ. writ of certiorari dismissed. page 266 u. s. 183 certiorari to review a judgment of the supreme court of south carolina which sustained a judgment against the director general of railroads for damages alleged to have resulted to the plaintiff from the refusal of a railway gateman to allow him access to a train, accompanied by abusive language, etc. mr. justice mc reynolds 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.

Full Judgment

Davis v. Currie - 266 U.S. 182 (1924)
U.S. Supreme Court Davis v. Currie, 266 U.S. 182 (1924)

Davis v. Currie

No. 60

Argued October 10, 1924

Decided November 17, 1924

266 U.S. 182

CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

SYLLABUS

A writ of certiorari will be dismissed if the case as relied on by the petitioner in argument is not the case as presented in the petition for the writ.

Writ of certiorari dismissed.

Page 266 U. S. 183

Certiorari to review a judgment of the Supreme Court of South Carolina which sustained a judgment against the Director General of Railroads for damages alleged to have resulted to the plaintiff from the refusal of a railway gateman to allow him access to a train, accompanied by abusive language, etc.

MR. JUSTICE Mc REYNOLDS 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.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial