Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority
| Decision Date | 15 April 1937 |
| Docket Number | No. 355.,355. |
| Citation | 19 F. Supp. 190 |
| Parties | ASHWANDER et al. v. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY et al. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama |
James Lawrence Fly, of Knoxville, Tenn., for plaintiff.
Cabaniss & Johnston and Martin, Turner & McWhorter, all of Birmingham, Ala., for defendant.
The original bill in this case was filed by Ashwander and other preferred stockholders of the Alabama Power Company, hereinafter called Company. The Tennessee Valley Authority, hereinafter called Authority, the Company and others were made parties defendant. The case was tried before Judge W. I. Grubb, my predecessor. He entered a decree enjoining the Authority from carrying out with the Company a joint-power contract of January 4, 1934. (D.C.) 9 F.Supp. 965. This decree contained the following paragraph, viz., "(7) The scope of the consideration and decree herein is limited to the issues and matters covered affirmatively by this decree, and this decree is, accordingly, without prejudice as to any and all other matters." The decree made no specific reference to what is generally termed the "Power Program." The Authority appealed from this decision to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and the plaintiffs filed a cross-appeal, contending that the decree should have included a declaratory judgment that would prevent the Authority from carrying out the power program.
The Circuit Court of Appeals decided that the plaintiffs took nothing on their cross-appeal and reversed the decree of this court enjoining the Authority from carrying out the contract of January 4, 1934. 78 F.(2d) 578.
Writ of certiorari was granted (296 U. S. 562, 56 S.Ct. 145, 80 L.Ed. 396) plaintiffs by the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals was affirmed. Mandate of the Supreme Court was issued to this court. In pursuance thereof, I entered a decree, as follows, in so far as here relevant, "it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed: * * * (2) That the aforesaid decree rendered by this court on March 2, 1935, be, and the same is, in its entirety set aside and held for naught, as to all parties respondents to said suit.
"(3) That the bill of complaint in said cause and all amendments and supplements thereto be and same are hereby dismissed, and all prayers for relief are hereby denied." 14 F.Supp. 11, 12. The plaintiffs appealed from this decree to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. However, this appeal was not prosecuted and was, therefore, dismissed.
As the case now stands, the decree rendered by me is the final disposition of the case. This decree sets aside the decree of Judge Grubb in its entirety and denies all prayers for relief. It is not inconsistent with the decision of the Supreme Court. Ashwander et al. v. Tennessee Valley Authority et al., 297 U.S. 288, 56 S.Ct. 466, 80 L.Ed. 688. Even if it were not consistent with said decision, it is the final decree in this case and supersedes all prior decrees. This final decree, in my opinion, effectively determines that the allegations of the bill do not entitle the plaintiffs to any relief prayed for and, in particular, determines that plaintiffs are not entitled to an adjudication of the constitutionality vel non of the power program.
The Company and others have filed a bill in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee against the Authority and others. I will not undertake here to analyze that bill. Suffice it to say that it is not materially different from the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tennessee Valley Authority v. TENNESSEE ELEC. P. CO.
...the Alabama Power Company, another, similarly restrained by the District Court for the Northern District of Alabama (Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 19 F.Supp. 190), withdraw their support of the decree, but the remaining plaintiffs defend The bill charges the defendants with havin......