GEORGIA RAILWAY & ELECTRIC CO. V. DECATUR, 297 U. S. 620 (1936)
Subscribe to Cases that cite 297 U. S. 620
Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/297/620/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/297/620/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Georgia Railway & Electric Co. v. Decatur, 297 U.S. 620 (1936)
Georgia Railway & Electric Co. v. Decatur
No. 625
Argued March 9, 1936
Decided March 30, 1936
297 U.S. 620
Syllabus
1. This Court reversed the judgment of a state court at a former hearing, upon the ground that a statute of the State, as apparently construed by that court, deprived the complaining party of property without due process of law, and by its mandate remanded the cause to the state court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this Court's opinion. Held, that the state court was not inhibited by the mandate from restating its construction of the statute so as to avoid the constitutional objection, and from enforcing the statute as thus explained. P. 297 U. S. 628.
2. A State may assess paving costs without regard to benefits, against street railroads occupying the streets paved, while others are assessed only on the basis of benefits. P. 297 U. S. 624.
3. Constitutional objections must be properly presented to the state court as a basis for their review in this Court. P. 297 U. S. 625.
181 Ga. 187, 182 S.E. 32, affirmed.
Appeal from a decree sustaining a special paving assessment against a street railway company. The case was here on a former appeal, 295 U. S. 165.