Los Angeles & SLR Co. v. United States

Decision Date16 March 1925
Docket NumberNo. 44.,44.
Citation4 F.2d 736
CourtU.S. District Court — Southern District of California
PartiesLOS ANGELES & S. L. R. CO. v. UNITED STATES et al.

James M. Beck and Blackburn Esterline, both of Washington, D. C., and J. Edwin Simpson, of Los Angeles, Cal., for the United States.

H. A. Scandrett, of Omaha, Neb., Fred E. Pettit, Jr., and A. S. Halsted, both of Los Angeles, Cal., and J. M. Souby, of Omaha, Neb., for Los Angeles & S. L. R. Co.

Walker D. Hines and Francis R. Stark, both of New York City, and Ralph H. Kimball, of Washington, D. C., for Western Union Telegraph Co.

Before ROSS, Circuit Judge, and BLEDSOE and McCORMICK, District Judges.

ROSS, Circuit Judge.

Existing circumstances do not admit of the preparation of a full opinion in this case, although it has received the careful consideration its importance demands. We will merely briefly indicate the views which are the basis of the conclusion to which we have come.

The Act of Congress of June 29, 1906 (34 Stat. 584 Comp. St. § 8563 et seq.), entitled "An act to amend an act entitled `An act to regulate commerce,' approved February fourth, eighteen hundred and eighty-seven, and all acts amendatory thereof, and to enlarge the powers of the Interstate Commerce Commission," in its sixteenth section provided, among other things, as follows:

"The venue of suits brought in any of the Circuit Courts of the United States against the Commission to enjoin, set aside, annul, or suspend any order or requirement of the Commission shall be in the district where the carrier against whom such order or requirement may have been made has its principal operating office, and may be brought at any time after such order is promulgated. And if the order or requirement has been made against two or more carriers then in the district where any one of said carriers has its principal operating office, and if the carrier has its principal operating office in the District of Columbia then the venue shall be in the district where said carrier has its principal office; and jurisdiction to hear and determine such suits is hereby vested in such courts. * * *"

The act of June 18, 1910 (36 Stat. 539), entitled "An act to create a Commerce Court, and to amend the act entitled `An act to regulate commerce,' approved February fourth, eighteen hundred and eighty-seven, as heretofore amended, and for other purposes," created a court of the United States, to be known as the Commerce Court, and to have the jurisdiction then possessed by Circuit Courts of the United States and the judges thereof over all cases of certain described kinds, including "cases brought to enjoin, set aside, annul, or suspend in whole or in part any order of the Interstate Commerce Commission."

October 22, 1913 (38 Stat. 208, 219, 220 Comp. St. §§ 992, 994, 995, 998), Congress provided, among other things as follows:

"The Commerce Court, created and established by the act entitled `An act to create a Commerce Court, and to amend the act entitled "An act to regulate commerce," approved February fourth, eighteen hundred and eighty-seven, as heretofore amended, and for other purposes,' approved June eighteenth, nineteen hundred and ten, is abolished from and after December thirty-first, nineteen hundred and thirteen, and the jurisdiction vested in said Commerce Court by said act is transferred to and vested in the several District Courts of the United States, and all acts or parts of acts in so far as they relate to the establishment of the Commerce Court are repealed. * * *

"The venue of any suit hereafter brought to enforce, suspend, or act aside, in whole or in part, any order of the Interstate Commerce Commission shall be in the judicial district wherein is the residence of the party or any of the parties upon whose petition the order was made, except that where the order does not relate to transportation or is not made upon the petition of any party the venue shall be in the district where the matter complained of in the petition before the Commission arises, and except that where the order does not relate either to transportation or to a matter so complained of before the Commission the matter covered by the order shall be deemed to arise in the district where one of the petitioners in court has either its principal office or its principal operating office. In case such transportation relates to a through shipment the term `destination' shall be construed as meaning final destination of such shipment.

"The procedure in the District Courts in respect to cases of which jurisdiction is conferred upon them by this act shall be the same as that heretofore prevailing in the Commerce Court. The orders, writs, and processes of the District Courts may in these cases run, be served, and be returnable anywhere in the United States; and the right of appeal from the District Courts in such cases shall be the same as the right of appeal heretofore prevailing under existing law from the Commerce Court. No interlocutory injunction suspending or restraining the enforcement, operation, or execution of, or setting aside, in whole or in part, any order made or entered by the Interstate Commerce Commission shall be issued or granted by any District Court of the United States, or by any judge thereof, or by any Circuit Judge acting as District Judge, unless the application for the same shall be presented to a Circuit or District Judge, and shall be heard and determined by three judges, of whom at least one shall be a Circuit Judge, and unless a majority of said three judges shall concur in granting such application. When such application as aforesaid is presented to a judge, he shall immediately call to his assistance to hear and determine the application two other judges. * * *"

The present petition was brought in this District Court, consisting at the time of one Circuit Judge and two District Judges, before whom testimony and other evidence was introduced, which was not heard or considered by the Interstate Commerce Commission, and therefore could not have formed any part of the basis of its order here complained of.

March 1, 1913 (37 Stat. 701 Comp. St. § 8591), Congress passed an act entitled "An act to amend an act entitled `An act to regulate commerce,' approved February fourth, eighteen hundred and eighty-seven, and all acts amendatory thereof," by providing for a valuation of the several classes of property of carriers subject thereto and securing information concerning their stocks, bonds, and other securities, the enacting clause of which added to the act of 1887, as amended, "a new section to be known as section nineteen a, and to read as follows:

"Sec. 19a. That the Commission shall, as hereinafter provided, investigate, ascertain, and report the value of all the property owned or used by every common carrier subject to the provisions of this act. To enable the Commission to make such investigation and report, it is authorized to employ such experts and other assistants as may be necessary. The Commission may appoint examiners who shall have power to administer oaths, examine witnesses, and take testimony. The Commission shall make an inventory which shall list the property of every common carrier subject to the provisions of this act in detail, and show the value thereof as hereinafter provided, and shall classify the physical property, as nearly as practicable, in conformity with the classification of expenditures for road and equipment, as prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission.

"First. In such investigation said Commission shall ascertain and report in detail as to each piece of property owned or used by said common carrier for its purposes as a common carrier, the original cost to date, the cost of reproduction new, the cost of reproduction less depreciation, and an analysis of the methods by which these several costs are obtained, and the reason for their differences, if any. The Commission shall in like manner ascertain and report separately other values, and elements of value, if any, of the property of such common carrier, and an analysis of the methods of valuation employed, and of the reasons for any differences between any such value, and each of the foregoing cost values.

"Second. Such investigation and report shall state in detail and separately from improvements the original cost of all lands, rights of way, and terminals owned or used for the purposes of a common carrier, and ascertained as of the time of dedication to public use, and the present value of the same, and separately the original and present cost of condemnation and damages or of...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT