Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More

Case Citation
Legal Case Name

St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Williams Case Brief

Supreme Court of the United States1919Docket #109149
251 U.S. 63 40 S. Ct. 71 64 L. Ed. 139 1919 U.S. LEXIS 1852

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A railroad challenged a state law imposing a $75 penalty for a 66-cent fare overcharge, arguing it violated due process. The Supreme Court upheld the penalty, finding it was not so severe or disproportionate as to be unconstitutional, given the state’s interest in enforcing its regulations.

Legal Significance: This case affirms a state’s broad discretion under its police power to impose substantial, punitive civil penalties to enforce economic regulations, provided the penalty is not “wholly disproportioned to the offense” and an opportunity exists to challenge the underlying regulation’s validity without incurring penalties.

St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Williams Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

An Arkansas statute regulated passenger rail fares and imposed a penalty of not less than $50 and not more than $300 for each instance a railroad charged more than the prescribed rate. The penalty was recoverable in a civil action by the aggrieved passenger. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. (the “Railway”) overcharged two passengers by sixty-six cents each. The passengers sued and each recovered the overcharge plus a $75 penalty and a $25 attorney’s fee, as provided by the statute. The Railway appealed, not to contest the overcharge itself, but to challenge the constitutionality of the penalty provision. The Railway argued that the penalty violated the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because it was so severe that it deterred challenges to the rate’s validity and was arbitrarily disproportionate to the actual damage sustained by the passengers. The Railway had not previously challenged the validity of the rate itself through available judicial procedures, such as an equity suit for an injunction. The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the judgments, upholding the statute.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does a state statute that imposes a civil penalty between $50 and $300, payable to the aggrieved passenger, for each fare overcharge violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as being excessively severe or disproportionate to the offense?

No. The Court held that the Arkansas statute’s penalty provision did not Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, se

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does a state statute that imposes a civil penalty between $50 and $300, payable to the aggrieved passenger, for each fare overcharge violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as being excessively severe or disproportionate to the offense?

Conclusion

This case establishes that states have significant latitude under their police powers Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris

Legal Rule

The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment limits a state's power Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim

Legal Analysis

The Court analyzed the Railway's due process challenge in two parts. First, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ulla

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A state statute imposing a $50-$300 penalty on a railroad for
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla paria

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More