Corporation Commission of Oklahoma v. Cary
| Decision Date | 23 December 1935 |
| Docket Number | No. 124,124 |
| Citation | 296 U.S. 452,80 L.Ed. 324,56 S.Ct. 300 |
| Parties | CORPORATION COMMISSION OF OKLAHOMA et al. v. CARY |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Oklahoma.
Mr. Holmes Baldridge, of Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellants.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 453-454 intentionally omitted] Messrs. Streeter B. Flynn and Robert M. Rainey, both of Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellee.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 454-457 intentionally omitted]
This suit was brought in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma to restrain the enforcement of an order of the Corporation Commission of that state reducing gas rates. Plaintiff, trustee of the properties of the Consolidated Gas Service Company, alleged that the order was confiscatory and violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Application for an interlocutory injunction was brought before the District Court composed of three judges. 28 U.S.C. § 380 (28 U.S.C.A. § 380). Defendants, the Corporation Commission and its members, moved to dismiss the complaint upon the ground that the court was without jurisdiction, by reason of the terms of the Act of Congress of May 14, 1934 (48 Stat. 775, 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 41(1, 1a) which provide that no District Court shall have jurisdiction to restrain the enforcement of an order of an administrative board or commission of a State, 'where jurisdiction is based solely upon the ground of diversity of citizenship, or the repugnance of such order to the Constitution of the United States, where such order (1) affects rates chargeable by a public utility, (2) does not interfere with interstate commerce, and (3) has been made after reasonable notice and hearing, and where a plain, speedy, and efficient remedy may be had at law or in equity in the courts of such State.'
Plaintiff contended that the Constitution and laws of Oklahoma did not afford an opportunity for judicial review in the courts of the state of orders affecting rates for the transportation and sale of gas. The District Court considered the provision of the Constitution of Oklahoma creating the Corporation Commission and providing for review of its orders (Const.Okl. art. 9, §§ 20, 23, 35) the state legislation with respect to appeals from orders affecting gas rates (Laws Okl. 1913, c. 93, § 5), and the pertinent decisions of the Supreme Court of the state. The District Court found that it had been repeatedly held by the state court that the reviewing power conferred upon it by the provision of the State Constitution was legislative in character (compare Oklahoma Natural Gas Company v. Russell, 261 U.S. 290, 291, 43 S.Ct. 353, 67 L.Ed. 659), and upon the question whether any opportunity was afforded in the courts of the state for a judicial review of an order of the Commission, the District Court found serious uncertainty because of 'diametrically...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Spector Motor Service v. Walsh
...L.Ed. 99, where the remedy depended upon "the problematical outcome of future consideration," and Corporation Commission of Oklahoma v. Cary, 296 U.S. 452, 458, 56 S.Ct. 300, 80 L.Ed. 324, where the opposed decisions of the state court had caused "serious In the Huffman case the Court did n......
-
Driscoll v. Edison Light Power Co 1939
...6 Mountain States Power Co. v. Public Service Comm., 299 U.S. 167, 170, 57 S.Ct. 168, 169, 81 L.Ed. 99; Corporation Comm. v. Cary, 296 U.S. 452, 56 S.Ct. 300, 80 L.Ed. 324. 7 Sec. 1103, P.L. 1053, Title 66 P.S.Pa. § 1433. 8 P.L. 1053, Title 66 P.S.Pa. § 1150. 9 'Temporary rates. (a) The com......
-
Marino v. Ragen
...L.Ed. 1134; Mountain States Power Co. v. Public Service Commission, 299 U.S. 167, 57 S.Ct. 168, 81 L.Ed. 99; Corporation Commission v. Cary, 296 U.S. 452, 56 S.Ct. 300, 80 L.Ed. 324; Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Kuykendall, 265 U.S. 196, 44 S.Ct. 553, 68 L.Ed. 975; Oklahoma Natural ......
-
Oklahoma Packing Co v. Oklahoma Gas Electric Co
...Gas & Electric Co. v. Oklahoma Packing Co., 292 U.S. 386, 388, 54 S.Ct. 732, 733, 78 L.Ed. 1318; Corporation Commission v. Cary, 296 U.S. 452, 458, 56 S.Ct. 300, 301, 80 L.Ed. 324. The contention of the complainants before the state court was that the Commission's order violated their right......