Could not find header file for oye

 

  • View enhanced case on Westlaw
  • KeyCite this case on Westlaw
  • http://laws.findlaw.com/us/206/139.html
    Cases citing this case: Supreme Court
    Cases citing this case: Circuit Courts
    AMERICAN EXP CO. v. COM. OF KENTUCKY, 206 U.S. 139 (1907)

    U.S. Supreme Court

    AMERICAN EXP CO. v. COM. OF KENTUCKY, 206 U.S. 139 (1907)

    206 U.S. 139

    AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY OF NEW York, Plff. in Err.,
    v.
    COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY.
    No. 583.

    Argued April 17, 18, 1907.
    Decided May 13, 1907.

    Messrs. Edmund F. Trabue, Lawrence Maxwell, Jr., John C. Doolan, Attilla Cox, Jr., and Joseph S. Graydon for plaintiff in error.

    Messrs. N. B. Hays and Charles H. Morris for defendant in error. [206 U.S. 139, 140]  

    Mr. Justice Brewer delivered the opinion of the court:

    This case, like the two preceding, was a prosecution of the express company for a violation of the Kentucky statute in respect to 'C. O. D.' shipments. It was tried in the circuit court before a jury, which returned a verdict of guilty, and fixed the penalty at $100 fine, which verdict was sustained and judgment entered thereon by the circuit court. The company appealed to the court of appeals, which affirmed the judgment (30 Ky. L. Rep. 207, 97 S. W. 807), and thereupon the case was brought here on writ of error.

    The consignee testified that he did not give an order for the shipment, while there was testimony on behalf of the consignor that such an order was filed with it in the name of the consignee, and the shipment made upon that order. The brief of the attorney general in the court of appeals, after referring to the testimony of a witness on behalf of the company, said:

    ... * *

    In view of the concession and contention of the attorney general we are of the opinion that there is nothing to substantially distinguish this case from the preceding. The same judgment, therefore, will be rendered in this case as in those.

    Mr. Justice Harlan, dissenting:

    I do not think that these are cases of legitimate interstate commerce. They show only devices or tricks by the express company to evade or defeat the laws of Kentucky relating to the sale of spirituous, vinous, or malt liquors. I dissent from the opinion and judgment in each case.

    FindLaw Career Center

    Ads by FindLaw