· 3/3/1919

Arkadelphia Milling Co. v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co.

Citations

249 U.S. 134

Syllabus

Orders of a state commission fixing railroad rates under legislative authority are state laws within the meaning of the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1891, § 5, and Jud. Code, § 238, allowing direct appeals from the district court to this court in cases in which a law of a State is claimed to contravene the Federal Constitution. P. 141. When this court, having jurisdiction on constitutional grounds, under Jud. Code, § 238, reverses a final injunctional decree of the district court on direct appeal, with directions to dismiss the bill without prejudice, and the district court,-acting under a reservation in its own decree, and within authority for further proceedings allowed by the mandate, assesses and decrees the damages caused .by its injunctions, such supplementary decree is part of the main cause and appealable directly to this court. Id. Upon reversal of final injunctional decrees of the district court with directions to dismiss the bills without prejudice, the mandates allowed further proceedings in the causes in conformity with the opinion and decree of this court, according to right and justice, etc. Held, that the district court was thus empowered to determine and decree damages arising under the injunction bonds prior to the reversed decrees. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. Co. v. McKnight, 244 IT. S. 368, explained. P. 143. In awarding final injunctions restraining the enforcement of railway rates as fixed by state authority, the district court ordered that the preliminary injunction bonds be released and the sureties thereon discharged from further liability. Held, that a failure to appeal from and assign error to this action created no obstacle to the assessment of damages under the bonds, after reversal of the final decrees by this court, where the mandate allowed further proceedings and the district court had retained jurisdiction to make further orders if necessitated by changed conditions. Id. In suits by ra

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

awarding restitution of enjoined rates to railroad company when defendant’s damages were not fully covered by the injunction bond
ordering ___ ___________ restitution by a regulated company that charged more during an injunction period than the rate ultimately deemed lawful
“a party against whom an erroneous judgment or decree has been carried into effect is entitled, in the event of a reversal, to be restored by his adversary to that which he has lost thereby”
“[A] party against whom an erroneous judgment or decree has been carried into eﬀect is entitled … to be restored by his adver- sary to that which he has lost thereby.”
“a party against whom an erroneous judgment or decree has been carried into effect is entitled, in the event of reversal, to be restored by his adversary to that which he has lost thereby”
“a party against whom an erroneous judgment or decree has been carried into effect is entitled, in the event of reversal, to be restored by his adversary to that which he has lost thereby”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Pitney

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.