eDiscovery, legal research and legal memo creation - ready to be sent to your counterparty? Get it done in a heartbeat with AI. (Get started for free)
What were the legal implications of the MELLON v.
O'Neil case concerning the role and authority of Directors General of Railroads?
The Supreme Court case Mellon, Director General of Railroads, etc., v.
O'Neil was decided on November 21, 1927, with a 9-0 ruling, dismissing the case.
The case originated from the New York State Trial Court and involved W.E.
Lynn, who brought an action for damages against Andrew W.
Mellon, the Director General of Railroads, for the failure to deliver a shipment of mules in good order.
The Director General of Railroads was a United States federal government position in the United States Railroad Administration (USRA), established on February 9, 1918, to manage the railroads during World War I.
The USRA had eight major divisions and seven regional offices, with the Director General of Railroads at its head.
Andrew W.
Mellon, the Director General of Railroads, was sued by W.E.
Lynn for damages, claiming that Mellon failed to deliver a shipment of mules in good order.
The case was related to other similar cases, including Mellon, Director General of Railroads, etc., v.
Goodyear and Mellon, Director General, Agent U.S.
Railroad Administration v.
Michigan Trust Co.
The latter case was argued in April 1926 and decided in May of the same year, while the former was argued and submitted in December 1927 and decided in May 1928.
The case involved the issue of whether the Director General of Railroads had authority over the railroads during the period of federal control, which ended on March 1, 1920.
The Supreme Court's ruling in Mellon v.
O'Neil set a precedent for the limits of authority of the Director General of Railroads during the period of federal control.
The case was significant because it clarified the role of the Director General of Railroads in managing the railroads during wartime and the period of federal control.
The Supreme Court's decision in Mellon v.
O'Neil was likely influenced by the earlier case of United States v.
Butterworth-Judson Corporation (269 U.S.
504), which dealt with the priority of claims against a railroad company.
The Mellon v.
O'Neil case is still studied by legal scholars today as an important precedent in understanding the authority and limitations of the Director General of Railroads during wartime and periods of federal control.
eDiscovery, legal research and legal memo creation - ready to be sent to your counterparty? Get it done in a heartbeat with AI. (Get started for free)