Citation network
Atchison, T. and S.F. Ry. Co.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 03, 1929
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
-
S. Supreme Court Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co., 279 U.S. 768 (1929) Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company v. UnitedSearch
-
route via the Southern from Kansas City, and the Commission did not order it. Compare St. Louis Southwestern R. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
upon the Commission's power to establish through routes. Compare United States v. MissouriSearch
-
Fe from Dodge City to Kansas City, and thence to the Gulf via the Southern. Compare St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Virginian Ry. v. UnitedSearch
-
Stat. 584. There is not, in that act as amended ( see United States v. AmericanSearch
-
power of the Commission to pass upon the reasonableness of rates. Compare Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Ry. Co. v. TennesseeSearch
-
even in what direction, Page 279 U. S. 778 or by what railroad, it will be carried. Southern Kansas Grain Assn. v. ChicagoSearch
-
but is to be treated or even converted into flour, before it proceeds on its journey to the Gulf. See Central R. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 257 U. S. 247 . Compare Texas & New Orleans R. Co. v. SabineSearch
-
Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern R. Co. v. SettleSearch
-
Wood v. NewSearch
-
Carolina Portland Cement Co. v. DirectorSearch
-
of law or practice which gives to a carrier the right to recapture traffic which it originated. Compare United States v. IllinoisSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
United States v. AmericanSearch
-
It was not made either before the Commission or the district court, and is clearly unfounded. See Virginian Ry. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
later link in the shipment is, when lower than the local, spoken of as a proportional rate. See Hocking Valley R. Co. v. LackawannaSearch
-
Swift & Co. v. DirectorSearch
-
Kansas City Board of Trade v. AtchisonSearch
-
Wichita Chamber of Commerce v. AlabamaSearch
-
Southern Kansas Grain Association v. ChicagoSearch
-
Port of New York Authority v. AtchisonSearch
-
Western Pacific R. Co. v. SouthernSearch
-
Atchison Board of Trade v. A.TSearch
-
See Interstate Commerce Commission v. NorthernSearch
-
Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
St. Louis S.W. Ry. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Manufacturers' Ry. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. IllinoisSearch
-
United States v. MissouriSearch
-
Lathrop-Marshall Grain Co. v. ChicagoSearch
-
Northwestern Ry. Co., 144 I.C.C. 227, 228. As to ratebreaking points, see Wichita Board of Trade v. AbileneSearch
-
Mississippi R. Co. Commission v. AlabamaSearch
-
Southern Kansas Grain Assn. v. ChicagoSearch
-
Omaha Corporation Commission v. AbileneSearch
-
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company v. UnitedSearch
-
Compare St. Louis Southwestern R. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Compare United States v. MissouriSearch
-
the Southern. Compare St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Compare Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Ry. Co. v. TennesseeSearch
-
the Gulf. See Central R. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Compare Texas & New Orleans R. Co. v. SabineSearch
-
Compare United States v. IllinoisSearch
-
See Virginian Ry. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
See Hocking Valley R. Co. v. LackawannaSearch
-
Southern Kansas Grain Association v. ChicagoSearch
-
Wichita Board of Trade v. AbileneSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial