U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 1909

United States v. New York, C. & St. L. R.

United States v. New York, C. & St. L. R.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Decided March 16, 1909 · Coxe, Lacombe, Ward
168 F. 699; 94 C.C.A. 76; 1909 U.S. App. LEXIS 4496

Counsel

Lyman M. Bass, U. S. Atty., and J. O. Moore, Asst. U. S. Atty., Hoyt & Spratt (Thomas D. Powell, of counsel), for defendant in error.

United States v. New York, C. & St. L. R.

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Since the decision below the Court of Appeals in the Sixth Circuit has held that each shipment not transported in conformity with the statute constitutes a separate offense. U. S. v. Baltimore Ohio S. W. R. R., 159 Fed. 33, 86 C. C. A. 223. We concur in its reasoning and conclusion.

Defendant in error also objects that there can be no review of the judgment by.the government on the ground that this is a criminal action. This point has been overruled in U. S. v. Baltimore & Ohio S. W. R. R., supra, and in the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Montana Central Ry. v. U. S. (C. C. A.) 164 Fed. 400.

The judgment is reversed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.