Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. United States, 254 U.S. 57 (1920)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 254 U.S. 51, click here.

Seaboard Air Line Railway Company v. United States


No. 27


Argued October 8, 11, 1920
Decided November 8, 1920
254 U.S. 57

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Syllabus

A discrimination between shippers, in charges for transportation, otherwise violative of § 2 of the Act to Regulate Commerce, cannot be justified by the exigencies of competition between carriers. P. 62. Wight v. United States, 167 U.S. 512.

In a case of alleged discrimination, findings of fact made by the Interstate Commerce Commission as to the likeness of contemporary transportation services rendered by carriers to different shippers and as to the substantial similarity of the circumstances and conditions in which they were rendered cannot be disturbed by the courts where the action of the Commission is neither arbitrary nor in excess of its authority. P. 62.

Each of certain railroads, in transporting carload freight to and from Richmond, made a practice of absorbing the charges for switching between its line and industries on the lines of the other railroads in that city if the freight moved over its line to or from points served also by the railroads over which it must be switched in Richmond, but refused to absorb such switching charges where this switching service was to be performed by a noncompetitive railroad. Held: (1) that a ruling of the Interstate Commerce Commission finding the practice discriminatory between shippers and unlawful under § 2 of the Commerce Act, and requiring the carriers to abstain from it and to maintain and apply uniform regulations and practices for the absorption of such switching charges and to collect no higher charges from shippers or receivers of such freight at Richmond than they contemporaneously collected from any other shipper or receiver of such freight there for a like service under substantially similar circumstances and conditions was not arbitrary or beyond the authority of the Commission; (2) that the order was not too vague and uncertain to be enforced. P. 63.

249 F. 368 affirmed.

The case is stated in the opinion.