Citation network
Black and White Cab Vs. Black and Yellow Cab
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 09, 1928
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, 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
-
Black & White Cab v. BlackSearch
-
Yellow Cab - 276 U.S. 518 (1928) U.S. Supreme Court Black & White Cab v. BlackSearch
-
Yellow Cab, 276 U.S. 518 (1928) Black & White Taxicab & Transfer Company v. BrownSearch
-
by this Court, by state courts generally, and by English courts, such contracts are valid. Delaware etc. R. Co. v. MorristownSearch
-
In these circumstances, courts will not inquire into motives when deciding concerning their jurisdiction. McDonald v. SmalleySearch
-
Pet. 620, 26 U. S. 624 . It is enough that respondent is the real party in interest. Smith et al. v. KernochenSearch
-
South Dakota v. NorthSearch
-
U. S. 286 , 192 U. S. 311 . It requires no discussion to distinguish Lehigh Mining & Mfg. Co. v. KellySearch
-
U. S. 327 , and Miller & Lux v. EastSearch
-
the railroad company's power under its charter, and cites the decision of the Kentucky Court of Appeals in McConnell v. PedigoSearch
-
broader construction than that insisted on by petitioner. In Louisville Page 276 U. S. 526 Property Co. v. CommonwealthSearch
-
clause. The railroad company is under no obligation to transport passengers or baggage from its station. McConnell v. PedigoSearch
-
their business. The contract does not relate to the railroad company's business as a common carrier. D. L. & W. R. Co. v. MorristownSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U. S. 182 . 4. The Court of Appeals of Kentucky held such contracts invalid in McConnell v. PedigoSearch
-
supra, and Palmer Transfer Co. v. AndersonSearch
-
Ky. 217,. Invalidity of a similar contract was assumed arguendo in Commonwealth v. LouisvilleSearch
-
or constitution of the state. The question there decided Page 276 U. S. 527 is one of general law. Donovan v. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
And state courts quite generally construe the common law as this Court has applied it. Old Colony Railroad Co. v. TrippSearch
-
Boston & Albany Railroad v. BrownSearch
-
New York, N.H. & H. R. Co. v. ScovillSearch
-
Griswold v. WebbSearch
-
New York, N.H. & H.R. Co. v. BorkSearch
-
Hedding v. GallagherSearch
-
Brown v. N.YSearch
-
Thompson's Exp. & Storage Co. v. WhitemoreSearch
-
Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. OldSearch
-
Rose v. PublicSearch
-
State v. DepotSearch
-
Railroad Co. v. KohlerSearch
-
Oregon Short Line R. Co. v. DavidsonSearch
-
Union Depot & Ry. Co. v. MeekingSearch
-
Dingman v. DuluthSearch
-
Lewis v. RailwaySearch
-
Co., 36 Tex.Civ.App. 48, 50. See Commonwealth v. PowerSearch
-
Napman v. PeopleSearch
-
Fluker v. GeorgiaSearch
-
decisions, the highest courts of Indiana and Mississippi hold such contracts invalid. Indianapolis Union R. Co. v. DohnSearch
-
State v. ReedSearch
-
Miss. 211. The same conclusion is reached in Cravens v. RodgersSearch
-
Montana Union Ry. Co. v. LangloisSearch
-
Kalamazoo Hack & Bus Co. Page 276 U. S. 528 v. SootsmaSearch
-
Arrangements similar in principle to that before us are sustained in English courts. Perth General Station Committee v. RossSearch
-
Barker v. MidlandSearch
-
interest is not to be presumed in the absence of showing that something improper is done or contemplated. Steele v. DrummondSearch
-
U. S. 199 . And it is to be remembered, as stated by Sir George Jessel, M.R., in Printing Co. v. SampsonSearch
-
Page 276 U. S. 529 prevents annoyance, serves convenience, and promotes safety of passengers. D. L. & W. R. Co. v. MorristownSearch
-
in the body of law constituting the general jurisprudence prevailing wherever the common law is recognized. Hunt v. Warnicke'sSearch
-
Lathrop v. CommercialSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial