Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission et al., 1938 — 305 U.S. 625 · caselaw · US
General
Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission et al.
305 U.S. 625·Supreme Court of the United States·1938
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
No. 232.
Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission et al.
October 10, 1938.
Messrs. Samuel W. Moore, Frank H. Moore, A. F. Smith, W. E. Davis, and T. P. Littlepage for petitioner.
Messrs. E. M. Reidy and Daniel W. Knowlton for Interstate Commerce Comm’n; Mr. Samuel W. Sawyer for Kansas City Terminal Ry. Co. ; and Messrs. Bruce Scott, Walter McFarland, W. F. Dickinson, Wallace T. Hughes, A. C. Spencer, Dana T. Smith, H. H. Larimore, F. W. Clements, Charles H. Woods, and R. S. Outlaw for Atchison, Topeka & S. F. Ry. Co. et al., respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia denied.