The New York Times The New York Times Washington   
Search:  

Powered by: FindLaw

Cases citing this case: Supreme Court
Cases citing this case: Circuit Courts
OMAHA & C B ST R. CO. v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION, 222 U.S. 582 (1911)

U.S. Supreme Court

OMAHA & C B ST R. CO. v. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION, 222 U.S. 582 (1911)

222 U.S. 582

OMAHA & COUNCIL BLUFFS STREET RAILWAY COMPANY et al., Appellants,
v.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION et al.
No. 846.

Supreme Court of the United States

November 6, 1911

Mr. John Lee Webster for appellants.

The Attorney General, Blackburn Esterline, and C. W. Needham for appellees. [222 U.S. 582, 583]  

Per Curiam:

Upon the authority of U. S. Rev. Stat. 716; Ex parte Milwaukee & M. R. Co. 5 Wall. 188, 18 L. ed. 676; Leonard v. Ozark Land Co. 115 U.S. 465, 468 , 29 S. L. ed. 445, 446, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 127; Re Claasen, 140 U.S. 200, 207 , 35 S. L. ed. 409, 412, 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 735; Re McKenzie, 180 U.S. 536, 549 , 45 S. L. ed. 657, 662, 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 468; United States v. Shipp, 203 U.S. 563, 573 , 51 S. L. ed. 319, 323, 27 Sup. Ct. Rep. 165, 8 A. & E. Ann. Cas. 265; and upon full consideration of the facts bearing upon the propriety of the appellants' motion for an order to maintain the status quo pending this appeal, it is ordered that the enforcement of the order of the Interstate Commerce Commission entered November 27, 1909, and drawn in question in this case, be, and it is, suspended and enjoined during the pendency of this appeal, upon condition that within ten days herefrom the appellants execute unto the Interstate Commerce Commission and file in this cause a good and sufficient bond in the sum of $10,000, with sureties to be approved by the clerk of this court, and conditioned that the appellants will promptly pay any and all damages which may be suffered by their several passengers and intended passengers by reason of the granting or continuance of this order if it is adjudged ultimately that the order of the Interstate Commerce Commission, drawn in question in this case, is a valid one.

Copyright © 2003 FindLaw