Florida East Coast Railway Company v. United States

• Decision Date: 19 May 1965
• Docket Number: No. 65-12-CIV.-J.,65-12-CIV.-J.
• Citation: 242 F. Supp. 490
• Parties: FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY, Plaintiff, and Southern Railway Company et al., Intervening Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES of America, and Interstate Commerce Commission, Defendants, and Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, A. Duda & Sons, Inc., and A. Duda & Sons Cooperative Association, Intervening Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida

242 F. Supp. 490

FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY, Plaintiff, and Southern Railway Company et al., Intervening Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES of America, and Interstate Commerce Commission, Defendants, and Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, A. Duda & Sons, Inc., and A. Duda & Sons Cooperative Association, Intervening Defendants.

No. 65-12-CIV.-J.

United States District Court M. D. Florida,

May 19, 1965.

Fred H. Kent, of Ulmer, Murchison, Kent, Ashby & Ball, Jacksonville, Fla., A. Alvis Layne and William A. Chesnutt, Washington, D. C., for plaintiff Florida East Coast Railway Co. W. Graham Claytor, Jr., James A. Bistline, Peter S. Craig, Washington, D. C., H. P. Osborne, Jr., John M. McNatt, Jr., Jacksonville, Fla., for intervening plaintiffs Southern Railway Co., Alabama Great Southern Railroad Co., Cincinnati, New Orleans & Texas Pacific Railway Co., New Orleans & Northeastern Railroad Co., Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co., and Carolina & Northwestern Railway Co.

Edward F. Boardman, U. S. Atty., William J. Hamilton, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Jacksonville, Fla., William H. Orrick, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., John H. D. Wigger, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for defendant United States.

Robert W. Ginnane, Gen. Counsel, Fritz R. Kahn, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Raymond M. Zimmet, Atty., I. C. C., Washington, D. C., for I. C. C.

Prime F. Osborn, Phil C. Beverly, Charles B. Evans, Jacksonville, Fla., for intervening defendant Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co.

William H. Maness, Kurz, Toole, Maness & Martin, Jacksonville, Fla., for intervening defendant A. Duda & Sons, Inc. and A. Duda & Sons Cooperative Association.

Before JONES, Circuit Judge, and SIMPSON and McRAE, District Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company (A C L) applied to the Interstate Commerce Commission for a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct, in Palm Beach County, Florida, an extension of an existing rail line, now terminating at the Okeelanta sugar mill, a distance of 6.5 miles east, and from this point it was proposed that one branch would run north 2.5 miles to the site of a packing house and precooling plant which A. Duda & Sons (Duda) proposed to build, and another branch would run south to the mill of the South Florida Sugar Company. The proceeding instituted by this application is the Commission's Finance Docket No. 22696. The Florida East Coast Railway Company (F E C) protested the granting of a certificate to the A C L and sought on its own behalf a certificate for the extension of an existing rail line from a sugar mill near Belle Glade, Florida, south and southeast, for a distance of about ten miles, through the property of Duda and others to the mill of the South Florida Sugar Company. The proceeding instituted by the F E C application is the Commission's Finance Docket No. 22777. The Commission granted the A C L application and issued a certificate of public convenience and necessity to it. The application of the F E C was denied.

The F E C has brought this action to enjoin, annul and set aside the order of the Commission. The Commission's order has been stayed by a preliminary injunction of this court. The Southern Railway and five affiliated companies (Southern) was permitted to intervene as plaintiffs. A C L and Duda were permitted to intervene as defendants. Southern filed a complaint, claiming it would lose interchange traffic at Jacksonville. The defendants and intervening defendants answered. A hearing was had on April 12, 1965, and a transcript of the proceedings before the Commission, with its report and order,¹ was offered and received in evidence. At the outset, the primary function of this Three-Judge statutory court² is to determine whether there is substantial evidence on the record as a whole to support the findings of the Commission, and whether it has applied proper legal standards in the conduct of the proceedings before it and in conclusions which it reaches³.

The F E C urges that the proposal of A C L is not, in fact, for a line of rail to serve the public but is rather for two private lines, one to serve Duda and the other to serve South Florida Sugar. The Commission considered the "private line" contention of the F E C and rejected it. This court has also given consideration to the question and finds it to be without merit. It is true that the greater part of shipments over the northerly leg of the A C L...