Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Knott Et Al., Railroad And Warehouse Commissioners Of The State Of Missouri

• 1912 • 230 U.S. 509 • White Court
The U.S. Supreme Court case Knott et al., Railroad and Warehouse Commissioners of the State of Missouri, 1912 revolved around a dispute between the state's railroad and warehouse commissioners and several railroads over freight rates. The commission had ordered reduced rates that were challenged by the railroads as being confiscatory, violating their rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to earn a reasonable return on their property. The court ruled in favor of the railroads, finding that while...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief White Court
Term: 1912
Docket: 343
230 U.S. 509
33 S. Ct. 984
57 L. Ed. 1595
1913 U.S. LEXIS 2688
Argued: Apr 01, 1912

Knott Et Al., Railroad And Warehouse Commissioners Of The State Of Missouri

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The U.S. Supreme Court case Knott et al., Railroad and Warehouse Commissioners of the State of Missouri, 1912 revolved around a dispute between the state's railroad and warehouse commissioners and several railroads over freight rates. The commission had ordered reduced rates that were challenged by the railroads as being confiscatory, violating their rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to earn a reasonable return on their property. The court ruled in favor of the railroads, finding that while states have power to regulate commerce within their borders including setting maximum charges for transportation services provided by public utilities like railways, such regulation must not be so restrictive as to deny just compensation for use of property or destroy its value. Therefore, if rate reductions result in earnings below a fair return on investment value - which was found to be true in this case - they are unconstitutional.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Knott et al., Railroad and Warehouse Commissioners of the State of Missouri, it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold a state law requiring railroads to provide separate but equal accommodations for black and white passengers violated both federal commerce laws and individual rights. The dissenters believed that such segregation inherently created inequality by stigmatizing one racial group as inferior. They also contended that this ruling interfered with interstate commerce because it imposed additional burdens on railroad companies operating across state lines, which could potentially disrupt trade between states. Furthermore, they asserted that this case raised serious constitutional issues about personal liberty and equality before the law, arguing against any legislation promoting racial discrimination or infringing upon citizens' freedom to travel freely within their own country.

Opinion written by Justice CEHughes(1)
Decided: Jun 16, 1913
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms