Skip to content


Southern Ry. Co. Vs. Burlington Lumber Co. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number225 U.S. 99
AppellantSouthern Ry. Co.
RespondentBurlington Lumber Co.
Excerpt:
.....ry. co. v. burlington lumber co., 225 u.s. 99 (1912) southern railway company v. burlington lumber company no. 236 argued may 3, 1912 decided may 27, 1912 225 u.s. 99 error to the supreme court of the state of north carolina syllabus decided on authority of southern railway co. v. reid, 222 u. s. 424 , and southern railway company v. reid & beam, 222 u. s. 444 . the facts are stated in the opinion. page 225 u. s. 100 mr. justice holmes delivered the opinion of the court. this is an action to recover penalties under a statute of north carolina for refusal to receive goods for shipment. as the statute is the same that was held bad, so far as it concerns commerce among the states, in .....
Judgment:
Southern Ry. Co. v. Burlington Lumber Co. - 225 U.S. 99 (1912)
U.S. Supreme Court Southern Ry. Co. v. Burlington Lumber Co., 225 U.S. 99 (1912)

Southern Railway Company v. Burlington Lumber Company

No. 236

Argued May 3, 1912

Decided May 27, 1912

225 U.S. 99

ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA

Syllabus

Decided on authority of Southern Railway Co. v. Reid, 222 U. S. 424 , and Southern Railway Company v. Reid & Beam, 222 U. S. 444 .

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Page 225 U. S. 100

MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is an action to recover penalties under a statute of North Carolina for refusal to receive goods for shipment. As the statute is the same that was held bad, so far as it concerns commerce among the states, in Southern R. Co. v. Reid, 222 U. S. 424 , and Southern R. Co. v. Reid, 222 U. S. 444 , a short statement will be enough. On January 26, 1907, the Burlington Lumber Company tendered to the railway company at Burlington, North Carolina, certain machinery for shipment to Saginaw, Michigan, on a through bill of lading. Saginaw was not on the railway company's line, the company had no rates to Saginaw, and the agent had to delay in order to inquire of his superiors. The result was that the through bill of lading was not issued until April 3. The suit, as we have said, is for the penalty, and nothing else. The supreme court of the state decided against the railway on the same ground that it did in the decisions already reversed. In the circumstances, it seems unnecessary to discuss the case more at length.

Judgment reversed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //