|
|
United States v. Florida East Coast Ry. Co., 410 U.S. 224 (1973)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
United States v. Florida East Coast Ry. Co., 410 U.S. 224 (1973)
United States v. Florida East Coast Railway Co. No. 70-279 Argued December 7, 1972 Decided January 22, 1973 410 U.S. 224
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Syllabus
The District Court ruled that appellee railroads were prejudiced by failure of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to hold oral hearings as required by §§ 556 and 557 of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) before establishing industry-wide per diem rates for freight-car use. The ICC did receive written submissions from appellees, but refused to conduct the hearings requested by appellees prior to completion of its rulemaking.
Held: The language of § 1(14)(a) of the Interstate Commerce Act that "[t]he Commission may, after hearing . . . establish reasonable rules . . ." did not trigger §§ 556 and 557 of the APA requiring a trial-type hearing and the presentation of oral argument by the affected parties; and the ICC’s proceeding was governed only b § 553 of the APA requiring notice prior to rulemaking. United States v. Allegheny-Ludlum Steel Corp., 406 U.S. 742. Nor does the "after hearing" language of § 1(14)(a) of the Interstate Commerce Act by itself confer upon interested parties either the right to present evidence orally and to cross-examine opposing witnesses, or the right to present oral argument to the agency’s decisionmaker. Pp. 234-246.
322 F.Supp. 725, reversed and remanded.
REHNQUIST, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL, and BLACKMUN, JJ., joined. DOUGLAS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEWART, J., joined, post, p. 246. POWELL, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," United States v. Florida East Coast Ry. Co., 410 U.S. 224 (1973) in 410 U.S. 224 410 U.S. 225. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=YUG8NQJXG8EG9DE.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." United States v. Florida East Coast Ry. Co., 410 U.S. 224 (1973), in 410 U.S. 224, page 410 U.S. 225. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=YUG8NQJXG8EG9DE.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in United States v. Florida East Coast Ry. Co., 410 U.S. 224 (1973). cited in 1973, 410 U.S. 224, pp.410 U.S. 225. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=YUG8NQJXG8EG9DE.
|