Citation network
Rice Vs. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- May 05, 1947
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
-
Rice v. SantaSearch
-
Fe Elevator Corp. - 331 U.S. 218 (1947) U.S. Supreme Court Rice v. SantaSearch
-
Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U.S. 218 (1947) Rice v. SantaSearch
-
law by acts of respondents in storing and dealing in their own grain while storing grain for the public. See Hannah v. PeopleSearch
-
of respondents as public grain warehousemen and dealers in grain. They are alleged to violate the rule of Hannah v. PeopleSearch
-
s also being a dealer in grain. They are said to be violative of the principles announced in Central Elevator Co. v. PeopleSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
warehouses engaged in the storage of grain for interstate or foreign commerce are in the federal domain, United States v. HastingsSearch
-
Congress may, if it chooses, take unto itself all regulatory authority over them ( see New York Central R. Co. v. NewSearch
-
share the task with the States, or adopt as federal policy the state scheme of regulation. See Prudential Ins. Co. v. BenjaminSearch
-
of Congress was. Congress legislated here in a field which the States have traditionally occupied. See Munn v. IllinoisSearch
-
States were not to be superseded by the Federal Act unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress. Napier v. AtlanticSearch
-
Allen-Bradley Local v. WisconsinSearch
-
as to make reasonable the inference that Congress left no room for the States to supplement it. Pennsylvania R. Co. v. PublicSearch
-
so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject. Hines v. DavidowitzSearch
-
by the federal law and the character of obligations imposed by it may reveal the same purpose. Southern R. Co. v. RailroadSearch
-
Charleston & W. C. R. Co. v. VarnvilleSearch
-
Napier v. AtlanticSearch
-
Co., supra. Or the state policy may produce a result inconsistent with the objective of the federal statute. Hill v. FloridaSearch
-
has left the police power of the States undisturbed except as the state and federal regulations collide. Townsend v. YeomansSearch
-
South Carolina Highway Dept. v. BarnwellSearch
-
over warehousemen which the Federal Act imposes. Federal Compress Co. v. McLeanSearch
-
perhaps, the requirements for a state license and the filing and publishing of rate schedules. See Union Brokerage Co. v. JensenSearch
-
relating to warehouse and warehousemen. Cf. Union Brokerage Co. v. JensenSearch
-
in the Act's administration by terminating the dual system of regulation. Cf. First Iowa Hydro-Electric Coop. v. FederalSearch
-
Congress can act so unequivocally as to make clear that it intends no regulation except its own. Bethlehem Steel Co. v. NewSearch
-
which, as noted in Federal Compress Co. v. McLeanSearch
-
these fields it has not moved. By nothing that it has done has it preempted those areas. And see Federal Compress Co. v. McLeanSearch
-
than this, we have refused to hold that state regulation was superseded by a federal law. Penn Dairies, Inc. v. MilkSearch
-
Together with No. 472, Illinois Commerce Commission et al. v. SantaSearch
-
Commerce Commission. The issues raised concerning it are considered in the companion cases decided this day, Rice v. BoardSearch
-
of Trade and Illinois Commerce Commission v. BoardSearch
-
and Forestry on H.R. 7, 71st Cong., 3d Sess., p. 10. And see id., pp. 22-26. Independent Gin & W. Co. v. DunwoodySearch
-
rates by Illinois, and did so despite the relation of the great grain elevators to interstate commerce. Munn v. IllinoisSearch
-
U. S. 113 , and see Budd v. NewSearch
-
Allen-Bradley Local v. BoardSearch
-
avoiding a claim of conflict between State and federal legislation. Compare the series of cases from Thompson v. MagnoliaSearch
-
Petroleum Co., 309 U. S. 478 , to Spector Motor Co. v. McLaughlinSearch
-
a balance, and not to be acknowledged merely platonically, have been indicated in my opinion in Bethlehem Steel Co. v. NewSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Rice v. SantaSearch
-
See Hannah v. PeopleSearch
-
of Hannah v. PeopleSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial