Skip to main content
· 6/5/1916

Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Harold

Citations

  • 241 U.S. 371
  • 36 S. Ct. 665
  • 60 L. Ed. 1050
  • 1916 U.S. LEXIS 1716

Syllabus

<p>Although the original interstate bill of lading of a car shipment was surrendered for an intrastate bill while the car was still in transit, if the car moved in a continuous interstate commerce shipment from its departure to its destination, a delivery at an intermediate point and substitution of an intrastate bill of lading is not' such a new and distinct shipment as takes the car out of interstate commerce.</p> <p>Although the Federal question may not have been asserted until the application for rehearing, if the state court then considered and disposed of it adversely to plaintiff in error, this court has jurisdiction under § 237, Judicial Code.</p> <p>The Kansas courts, in determining the responsibility of the carrier under the bill of lading of an interstate shipment, having applied a local rule investing an innocent holder of a bill of lading with, rights not available to the shipper, held that such rule is in direct conflict with the general commercial law on the subject, and applying the same to an interstate shipment was reversible error.</p> <p>Qucere, Whether attributing such characteristics to an interstate bill of lading in conflict with the general commercial rule would not, even ■ in the absence of legislation by Congress, constitute a direct burden on interstate commerce.</p> <p>The Carmack Amendment to the Act to Regulate Commerce, being an assertion of the power of Congress over the Subject of interstate shipments, the duty to issue bills of lading and the responsibilities thereunder, was action by Congress in regard thereto and necessarily excludes state action in regard thereto.</p> <p>The prime object of the Carmack Amendment was to bring about a uniform rule of responsibility as to interstate commerce and interstate bills of lading.</p> <p>The principal subject of responsibility in regard to a matter within its exclusive control embraced by an Act of Congress, necessarily carries with it the incidents thereto.</p>

How courts have described this case

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

  • collateral insurance contract does not super-cede obligations under bill of lading
  • “The Carmack Amendment ... was an assertion of the power of Congress over the subject of interstate shipments, the duty to issue bills of lading and the responsibilities thereunder, which in the nature of things excluded state action.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: White

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.