King v. United States,
Annotate this Case
344 U.S. 254 (1952)
- Syllabus |
U.S. Supreme Court
King v. United States, 344 U.S. 254 (1952)
King v. United States
Argued October 15, 1952
Decided December 22, 1952
344 U.S. 254
1. In prescribing intrastate freight rates for railroads under § 13(4) of the Interstate Commerce Act, the Interstate Commerce Commission may give weight to deficits in passenger revenue. Pp. 344 U. S. 260-267.
(a) Under § 15a(2) of the Interstate Commerce Act and the National Transportation Policy of 1940, the Commission may give weight to passenger revenue deficits in prescribing interstate freight rates to meet over-all revenue needs. Pp. 344 U. S. 263-264.
(b) The same National Transportation Policy applies to § 13(4) as to § 15a(2). Whichever section is used, the same economic considerations underlie the relation between freight rates and passenger deficits, whether interstate or intrastate. P. 344 U. S. 266.
2. The findings of the Commission which are involved in this proceeding are sufficient to sustain the Commission's order prescribing intrastate freight rates for Florida railroads which will reflect the same increases as have been authorized by the Commission for comparable interstate traffic. Pp. 344 U. S. 267-276.
(b) To permit material and reports which were before the Commission in prescribing a nationwide increase in interstate freight rates and in further increasing interstate freight rates for the southern territory (including Florida) to be applied under § 15a, but not under § 13(4), would be contrary to the complementary nature of those sections. Pp. 344 U. S. 272-273.
(c) The Commission's jurisdiction over intrastate rates is not limited to cases where those rates are confiscatory. It is sufficient that the existing intrastate rates cause "unjust discrimination against interstate or foreign commerce." P. 344 U. S. 274.
(d) Where the Commission seeks to deal generally with rates and revenues in a large area on evidence typical of the area as a
whole, it may proceed by way of a general order supported by sufficient evidence applicable to the whole territory, but it is well to leave the way open for modifications of that general order in specific situations where the general order is not justly applicable. Pp. 344 U. S. 275-276.
101 F.Supp. 941, affirmed.
A three-Judge District Court sustained an order of the Interstate Commerce Commission prescribing intrastate freight rates for Florida railroads. 101 F.Supp. 941. On appeal to this Court under 28 U.S.C. (Supp. V) §§ 1253, 2101(b), affirmed, p. 344 U. S. 276.