Citation network
King Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Dec 22, 1952
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
-
King v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 344 U.S. 254 (1952) U.S. Supreme Court King v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 344 U.S. 254 (1952) King v. UnitedSearch
-
authorized by the Commission for comparable interstate traffic. Pp. 344 U. S. 267 -276. (a) North Carolina v. UnitedSearch
-
of return may be exacted from the one than from the Page 344 U. S. 262 other. ( Property Owners' Committee v. ChesapeakeSearch
-
revenue deficits in prescribing interstate freight rates to meet over-all revenue needs. See United States v. LouisianaSearch
-
whether interstate or intrastate. This was well considered throughout the opinion of the Court in United States v. LouisianaSearch
-
U.S. at 290 U. S. 74 -75. This was confirmed in Florida v. UnitedSearch
-
North Carolina v. UnitedSearch
-
Florida v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. LouisianaSearch
-
were considered in North Carolina v. UnitedSearch
-
rates more specifically, or to separate intrastate and interstate costs and revenues. Compare American Express Co. v. CaldwellSearch
-
Illinois Commerce Commission v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
States, 292 U. S. 474 , 292 U. S. 483 -484. See also Montana v. UnitedSearch
-
evidence, would have provided a constitutional ground for enjoining the state rate. See Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. ConleySearch
-
Northern Pacific R. Co. v. NorthSearch
-
that will remove the discrimination without raising the rate beyond the zone of reasonableness. See United States v. LouisianaSearch
-
Wisconsin R. Commission v. ChicagoSearch
-
U. S. 70 , 290 U. S. 75 -76, and see 290 U. S. 78 -79. See also Illinois Commerce Commission v. UnitedSearch
-
Georgia P.S. Commission v. UnitedSearch
-
of that general order in specific situations where the general order is not justly applicable. North Carolina v. UnitedSearch
-
by the Commission were not adequate to support the order, and would set aside the order on authority of North Carolina v. UnitedSearch
-
Charges, 284 I.C.C. 167. The intrastate rates there ordered into effect by the Commission were set aside in Montana v. UnitedSearch
-
Dakota, 236 U. S. 585 , and Norfolk & W. R. Co. v. ConleySearch
-
I.C.C. at 73. As to this alternative provision, see also Wisconsin R. Commission v. ChicagoSearch
-
Houston, E. & W.T. R. Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
See Illinois Commerce Commission v. UnitedSearch
-
Louisiana P.S. Commission v. TexasSearch
-
Alabama v. UnitedSearch
-
New York v. UnitedSearch
-
See Wisconsin R. Commission v. ChicagoSearch
-
to the passenger deficits, we do not know the amount. The absence of these material findings, see North Carolina v. UnitedSearch
-
to adopt measures 'to promote its growth and insure its safety' ( County of Mobile v. KimballSearch
-
American Express Co. v. SouthSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court King v. UnitedSearch
-
Property Owners' Committee v. ChesapeakeSearch
-
See United States v. LouisianaSearch
-
Compare American Express Co. v. CaldwellSearch
-
Montana v. UnitedSearch
-
See Norfolk & Western R. Co. v. ConleySearch
-
of North Carolina v. UnitedSearch
-
and Norfolk & W. R. Co. v. ConleySearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial