United States v. Corrick, 298 U.S. 435 (1936)

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 298 U.S. 426, click here.

United States v. Corrick

No. 656

Argued April 6, 1936
Decided May 18, 1936
298 U.S. 435

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Syllabus

1. On appeal from the granting or refusal of an interlocutory injunction, inquiry is limited to the question whether the court abused its discretion. P. 437.

2. A bill by operators of Market Agencies to enjoin the Secretary of Agriculture from instituting prosecutions for violations of an order fixing their rates under the Packers & Stockyards Act, the ultimate purpose of the suit being to secure a decree upholding a rate schedule posted by the plaintiffs, is not a bill to set aside or suspend the order, within the jurisdiction of the District Court. P. 438.

3. When the Secretary of Agriculture, pursuant to § 310 of the Packers & Stockyards Act, orders specified rates thereafter to be charged by Market Agencies, these become the only lawful rates, and so remain until the further order of the Secretary. P. 439.

4. The Secretary of Agriculture, after inquiry and full hearing, fixed rates thereafter to be charged by the Market Agencies, and these had not been set aside or enjoined in any appropriate judicial proceeding or been altered by subsequent order of the Secretary. Held that the District Court was without power to enjoin the prosecution of the operators of the Agencies for charging rates other than those set by the Secretary. P. 440.

5. Lack of jurisdiction in a federal court over the subject matter of the litigation cannot be waived by the parties. The court should decline to proceed with the cause. P. 440.

6. If the record discloses that the lower court was without jurisdiction, this Court will notice the defect although the parties make no contention concerning it. P. 440.

7. This Court has jurisdiction on appeal to correct the error of a District Court in entertaining a suit over which it had no jurisdiction. Id.

Reversed.

Appeal from an interlocutory decree of a three-judge District Court enjoining prosecution of plaintiffs for violation of the Packers & Stockyards Act. Cf. the last preceding case.