POSTAL TELEGRAPH CABLE COMPANY
v.
BALTIMORE

U.S. | 1895-01-28
No. 828
156 U.S. 210 Supreme Court of the United States (1895) Caution
Also reported at: 39 L. Ed. 399 · 15 S. Ct. 356 · 1895 U.S. LEXIS 2127 · SCDB 1894-083
Cited by 15 cases
Opinion of the Court
The Chief Justice:

The Chief Justice:

The judgment is affirmed upon the authority of St. Louis v. Western Union Tel. Co., 148 U. S. 92.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • The City of Pensacola v. The S. Bell Tel. Co., 49 Fla. 161 (Fla. 1905)
    …e, but the use of the streets for telephone poles was not a private use. We find in the latter decision no recantation of the arguments or opinions expressed in the former, but .rather their affirmance in Postal Tel. Cable Co. v. City of Baltimore, 156 U. S. 210, 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. 356. It is shown by these and other decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States, and the Appellate Courts of New York and Pennsylvania, that nntoicipalities which have the power and are charged with the duty of regulating…
  • W. Union Tel. Co. v. The State of Kan. Ex rel. Coleman, 216 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1910)
  • Atl. & Pac. Tel. Co. v. Philadelphia, 190 U.S. 160 (U.S. 1903)
    …S. 691; Huse v. Glover, 119 U. S. 543; Ouachita Packet Company v. Aiken, 121 U. S. 444; St. Louis v. Western Union Telegraph Company, 148 U. S. 92; St. Louis v. Western Union Telegraph Company, 149 U. S. 465; Postal Tel. Cable Company v. Baltimore, 156 U. S. 210; Richmond v. Southern Bell Telephone Company, 174 U. S. 761, 771. [*164] The tax sought to be collected in this case was not a tax upon the property or franchises of the company, nor in the nature of rental for occupying certain portions of the stre…

Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw