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

United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company

• 1913 • 231 U.S. 274 • White Court
In the case of United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, 1913, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over freight charges between the federal government and a railroad company. The government had contracted with the railroad to transport mail at a specified rate per pound but later claimed that it was overcharged because some of its shipments included equipment necessary for handling mail (such as pouch racks and apartment cases), which should not have been counted in calculating...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: 1913
Docket: 385
231 U.S. 274
34 S. Ct. 75
58 L. Ed. 218
1913 U.S. LEXIS 2566
Argued: Jan 16, 1913

United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company

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

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, 1913, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over freight charges between the federal government and a railroad company. The government had contracted with the railroad to transport mail at a specified rate per pound but later claimed that it was overcharged because some of its shipments included equipment necessary for handling mail (such as pouch racks and apartment cases), which should not have been counted in calculating weight for transportation costs. The court held that these items were part of what made up 'mail' under their contract and thus could be charged by weight like any other component of mail shipment. Therefore, it found in favor of Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

The dissenting opinion in the case of United States v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company argued that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) did not have the authority to determine what constituted a reasonable rate for railroads, as this power was vested solely with Congress under the Constitution. The dissenters believed that allowing an administrative agency like ICC to set rates would be tantamount to delegating legislative powers, which they viewed as unconstitutional. They also disagreed with majority's interpretation of "just and reasonable" standard applied by ICC when setting railroad rates, arguing it should reflect market conditions rather than being arbitrarily determined by an administrative body. Furthermore, they expressed concern about potential negative impacts on private property rights and free enterprise system if such broad regulatory powers were granted to government agencies without clear constitutional or statutory basis.

Opinion written by Justice HHLurton
Decided: Dec 01, 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