Illinois Central Railroad v. Mulberry Hill Coal Co.

Citations

• 238 U.S. 275
• 35 S. Ct. 760
• 59 L. Ed. 1306
• 1915 U.S. LEXIS 1620

Syllabus

<p>A state statute which merely requires a railroad company to furnish cars within a reasonable time after demand made for them, is not such a direct burden upon interstate commerce, as to be void in the absence of legislation on the subject by Congress; and so held as to ch. 114, § 84, Rev. Stat. Illinois, 1913.</p> <p>Whether such a statute, valid when enacted, became an unconstitutional burden on interstate commerce on the enactment of the amendment of the Interstate Commerce Act, not now decided as that point was not raised in either of the state courts.</p> <p>The state courts have jurisdiction of a case for damages against a carrier for failure to deliver cars in accordance with its own rules for distribution, where the rule itself is not attacked but discrimination against plaintiff notwithstanding the rule is the basis of the suit. Penna. R. R. v. Puritan Coal Co., 237 U. S. 121.</p> <p>While the amendment of 1906 to the Interstate Commerce Act gave new rights to shippers, it preserved existing rights and did not supersede the jurisdiction of the state courts in any case, new or old, where the decision did not involve the determination of matters • calling for the exercise of administrative power and discretion of the Commission or relate to a subject as to which the jurisdiction of the Federal courts had otherwise been made exclusive. Id.</p> <p>257 Illinois, 80, affirmed.</p>