New York ex rel. Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Knight
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued December 11, 1903 ; January 4, 1904
[*25] [**203] MR. JUSTICE BREWER, after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court.
The contention of the company is that this cab service is merely an extension and therefore a part of its interstate [***8] transportation; that it is not carrying on a cab business generally in the city of New York, but is merely furnishing the service to those who seek to take over its lines some interstate transportation, thus commencing the transportation from their houses instead of from the ferry landing, or like service to those who have already received such interstate transportation, thus completing the transportation to their places of destination; that the character of the business remains unchanged, although individuals may avail themselves of this service who do not intend or have not received any interstate transportation, for they who thus use the service do so wrongfully and against the wish of the company. In other words, the company, to promote its general business, seeks only to complete the continuous transportation of interstate passengers to or from their residences or hotels in New York city instead of commencing and ending such transportation at the ferry landing at Twenty-third street; the character of the service depends not on the action of the passenger, but on the purpose of the company in providing it, and the omission to include the charge for the cab service in the charges [***9] for other transportation arises from the practical difficulty of making such inclusion, and does not alter the fact that such cab service is a part of the interstate transportation.
[*26] To hold the even balance between the Nation and the States in the exercise of their respective powers and rights, always difficult, is becoming more so through the growing complexity of social life, and business conditions. Into many relations and transactions there enter elements of a national as well as those of a state character, and to determine in a given case which elements dominate and assign the relation or transaction to the control of the Nation or of the State, is often most perplexing. And this case fully illustrates the perplexities. Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
192 U.S. 21 *; 24 S. Ct. 202 **; 1904 U.S. LEXIS 1029 ***; 48 L. Ed. 325
STATE OF NEW YORK ex rel. PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY v. KNIGHT
Prior History: [***1] ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
transportation, interstate, cab, carriage, commerce
Criminal Law & Procedure, Warrantless Searches, Stop & Frisk, Detention, Tax Law, State & Local Taxes, Public Utility Taxes, Exemptions, Franchise Taxes, General Overview, Business & Corporate Compliance, Transportation Law, Interstate Commerce, State Powers, Evidence, Burdens of Proof