Skip to main content
· 6/1/1921

Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Ault

Citations

  • 256 U.S. 554
  • 41 S. Ct. 593
  • 65 L. Ed. 1087
  • 1921 U.S. LEXIS 1587

Syllabus

<p>1. A railroad corporation is not liable, either at common- law or under § 10 of the Federal Control Act, upon a 'cause of action (in this case for wages), arising out of the operation of its railroa.d by the Government, through the Director General of Railroads. P. 557.</p> <p>2. Under § 10 of the Federal Control Act, if the cause of action arose prior to government control, suit might be instituted or continued to judgment against the owner-company as though there had been no taking over by the Government, save for the immunity of the physical property from levy .and the power of the President to regulate suits in the public interest: if it arose during government operation, the “carrier while under Federal control,” meaning in this connection the transportation system as distinguished from its corporate owner, was still liable and, by legal implication, suit could .be brought against the Government, or its operating agency, as the legal person responsible under the existing law for such carrier’s acts. P. 561.</p> <p>3. The order of the Director General of Railroads providing that suits on causes of action arising from the operation of any carrier during government control should be brought against him, and for his substitution as defendant in pending suits of that class brought against the carrier eompaniés, was within his authority. P. 561.</p> <p>4. The clause of § 10 of the Federal Control. Act declaring that the carriers “shall be subject to all laws and liabilities as common carriers, whether arising under State or Federal laws or at common law,” and the provision of § 15 that the “lawful police regulations of the several States” shall continue unimpaired, do not permit an action against the Director General to recover a penalty. P. 563. ■ -</p> <p>5. In an action against the Director General of Railroads, the determination .whether the liability imposed by a state statute is in the nature of compensation or penalty requires the application of federal law

How courts have described this case

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

  • whether an award is compensation or is a penalty not included in a waiver of immunity is a question of federal, not state, law
  • whether an award is compensation or is a penalty not included in a waiver of immunity is a question of federal, not state, law
  • “Whatever name be applied, the element of punishment clearly predominates and Congress has not given its consent that suits of this character be brought against the United States”
  • “[T]here is nothing either in the purpose or the letter of these clauses to indicate that congress intended to authorize suit against the government for a penalty, if it should fail to perform the legal obligations imposed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brandeis

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.