Davis v. L. L. Cohen & Co., Inc.
268 U.S. 638 (1925)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Davis v. L. L. Cohen & Co., Inc., 268 U.S. 638 (1925)

Davis v. L. L. Cohen & Company, Inc.

No. 331

Argued April 21, 1925

Decided June 8, 1925

268 U.S. 638


1. A judgment entered in the Superior Court in Massachusetts in accordance with a rescript from the Supreme Judicial Court on exceptions reserved held reviewable on writ of error directed to the Superior Court. P. 268 U. S. 639.

2. The cause of action for damage to goods in transport over a railroad under federal control was against the Director General of Railroads exclusively. P. 268 U. S. 640.

3. When such an action was erroneously brought against the railroad company, it could not be treated as an action against the Director General, and service of process did not bring him into court though made on an agent of the company who might have been properly served in an action against the Director General. Id.

4. Where such an action against a railroad company was pending at the termination of federal control, held (a) that substitution, as defendant, of the Agent appointed by the President under the Transportation Act, 1920, is not permissible under § 206(d) thereof, which relates only to suits previously brought against the Director General; (b) that such substitution is in effect the commencement of a new action, and a state statute construed as allowing this by amendment later than two years from the date of the Transportation Act is repugnant to the time limitation in § 206(a) of that Act, and void. P. 268 U. S. 642.

247 Mass. 259 reversed.

Error to a judgment entered in a Superior Court of Massachusetts upon a rescript from the Supreme Judicial Court, in an action for damages, begun against a railroad company, in which the Agent appointed by the President under the Transportation Act was substituted as party defendant.

Page 268 U. S. 639

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.