Supreme Court of the United States, 1872

People v. Central Railroad

Supreme Court of the United States · Decided January 22, 1872

79 U.S. 455; 20 L. Ed. 458; 12 Wall. 455; 1870 U.S. LEXIS 1219 (United States Reports)

Cases that cite this one

15 later published cases cite this decision.

League to Save Lake Tahoe v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (9th Cir. 1975)
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority v. One Parcel of Land in Montgomery County (District Court, D. Maryland 1980)
Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission v. Miller (District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania 1956)
Nysa-Ila Vacation and Holiday Fund and Nysa-Ila Gai Fund v. The Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor (2d Cir. 1984)
Cuyler v. Adams (Supreme Court of the United States 1981)
People Ex Rel. Younger v. County of El Dorado (Cal. 1971)
Port Authority Bondholders Protective Committee, Henry W. Klein, Alvin S. Lane, Adele W. Ginsberg and Morris L. Lewy v. Port of New York Authority (2d Cir. 1967)
Henderson v. Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission (Pa. 1949)
Hinderlider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek Ditch Co. (Supreme Court of the United States 1938)
Old Town Trolley Tours of Washington, Inc. v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commission (D.C. Cir. 1997)
Terry Collins v. Promark Products, Inc., Defendant-Third-Party United States of America, Third-Party (2d Cir. 1992)
Hill v. Joseph (New York Supreme Court 1954)
Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission v. Colburn (Supreme Court of the United States 1940)
Clarke v. Ackerman (New York Supreme Court 1934)
Hall v. Allen, Assignee (Supreme Court of the United States 1871)

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

The CHIEF JUSTICE:

We think that the statement of the case shows that the question arose under the agreement and not under any act of Congress. The assent of Congress did not make the act giving it a statute of the United States, in the sense of the 25th section of the Judiciary Act. The construction of the act was in no way drawn in question, nor has any title or right been set up under it and denied ■by the State court. It had no effect beyond giving the consent. of Congress to the compact between the two States.

The writ of error must, therefore, be

Dismissed.

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