Southern Pacific Co. v. ICC - 219 U.S. 433 (1911)


U.S. Supreme Court

Southern Pacific Co. v. ICC, 219 U.S. 433 (1911)

Southern Pacific Company v.

Interstate Commerce Commission

No. 527

Argued December 13, 1910

Decided February 20, 1911

219 U.S. 433

Syllabus

An order of the Interstate Commerce Commission, made in consequence of assumption of powers not possessed by it, is void, and its enforcement should be restrained by the courts.

The powers of the Interstate Commerce Commission do not extend to regulating and controlling the policy of the owners of railroads in fixing rates, and it cannot substitute for a just and reasonable rate, a lower rate either on the ground of policy or on the ground that the railroad was by its former conduct estopped from charging a reasonable rate.

Where the shippers do not complain of a new and higher rate because it is intrinsically an unreasonable one, but because, although reasonable, the railroads are estopped to advance it on account of having maintained the lower rate for a considerable period, it is beyond the power of the Commission to direct a restoration of the old rate, and so held in regard to the Willamette Valley lumber rates.

Where the Commission makes an order restoring a rate that shows on its face it was made on the ground that the railroad was estopped to increase it, the order will not be presumed to have been made for the purpose of establishing a reasonable rate if it excludes a section from the benefit of the restored rate which amounts to a discrimination against that section.

Questions arising on the validity of an order of the Interstate Commerce Commission fixing a rate do not become moot merely because the period for which the rate is prescribed has expired where an element of liability for reparation remains. See Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, post, p. 219 U. S. 498.

Page 219 U. S. 434

The facts, which involve the validity of an order of the Interstate Commerce Commission in regard to appellants' rates on lumber, are stated in the opinion.

Page 219 U. S. 437



Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw 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.