Hollis v. Kutz

Citation255 U.S. 452,65 L.Ed. 727,41 S.Ct. 371
Decision Date21 March 1921
Docket NumberNo. 397,397
PartiesHOLLIS et al. v. KUTZ et al
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

Mr. Roscoe F. Walter, of Washington, D. C., for appellants.

Mr. F. H. Stephens, of Washington, D. C., for appellee Public Utilities Commission.

Mr. Benjamin S. Minor, of Washington, D. C., for appellee Washington Gaslight Co.

Mr. Justice HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a bill in equity brought by private consumers of gas to have two orders of the Public Utilities Commission that increase the rate for gas to private consumers declared void. The first order, No. 254, March 15, 1918, raised the rate from 75 cents per thousand feet to 90 cents. The second, No. 314, March 15, 1919, raised it to not exceeding 95 cents; the orders being made under the authority of the Act of March 4, 1913, c. 150, § 8, 37 Stat. 938, 974, et seq., establishing the Public Utilities Commission of the District of Columbia and fixing its powers. The bill and the appeal to this Court are said to be based upon paragraph 64, of section 8, 37 Stat. 988. It is alleged that the orders violate the plaintiffs' constitutional rights because the rate to be charged to the United States and to the District remains the statutory rate of 70 cents, and to certain other takers still less, and that if the United States and District had paid 90 cents for the year 1918 the Gas Company would have received a return of about six per cent. It is said that the difference is an unlawful discrimination and that the plaintiffs are required to make up the loss incurred by furnishing the gas to the Government and the District at less than cost. The bill was dismissed by the Supreme Court for want of equity and because not filed within one hundred and twenty days after the entry of the order of March 15, 1918, as required by section 8, par. 65. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decree on the different ground that a formal complaint and hearing before the Commission were a condition of the right to sue in the courts. The provision in paragraph 67 for the transmission of any new evidence taken in the suit to the Commission for its further consideration, and other details, were thought to indicate that the suit was in the nature of an appeal.

We are unable to agree with the opinion of the Court of Appeals. Assuming that the bill is based upon the statute the language of paragraph 64 is that any person interested and dissatisfied with any order fixing any rate may commence a proceeding in equity. We do not perceive any advantage in requiring a party to file a complaint asking the Commission to review a decision just reached by it after a public hearing, nor do we see such a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Puget Sound Power Light Co v. City of Seattle, Wash 12 8212 15, 1934
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • March 19, 1934
    ...which it taxes. Compare Springfield Gas & Electric Co. v. Springfield, 257 U.S. 66, 42 S.Ct. 24, 66 L.Ed. 131; Hollis v. Kutz, 255 U.S. 452, 41 S.Ct. 371, 65 L.Ed. 727; Emergency Fleet Corp. v. Western Union, 275 U.S. 415, 48 S.Ct. 198, 72 L.Ed. 345. The state may tax different types of tax......
  • Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Murray
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • May 21, 1929
  • United States v. Public Utilities Commission, 8995.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit
    • September 24, 1945
    ...Western Pacific California Railroad v. Southern Pacific Co., 284 U.S. 47, 51, 52 S.Ct. 56, 76 L.Ed. 160. See Hollis v. Kutz, 255 U.S. 452, 454, 41 S.Ct. 371, 65 L.Ed. 727; Yankee Network, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 71 App.D.C. 11, 14, 15, 107 F.2d 212, 215, 216; 47 U.S.C.A. ......
  • Hardy v. Rossell
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • March 29, 1955
    ...Great Northern Railway Co. v. Merchants Elevator Co., 1922, 259 U.S. 285, 290, 42 S.Ct. 477, 66 L.Ed. 943; Hollis v. Kutz, 1921, 255 U.S. 452, 454, 41 S.Ct. 371, 65 L.Ed. 727. 34 Fischer v. Haeberle, D.C.E.D.N.Y.1948, 80 F.Supp. 35 See H.R. 3085, 84th Congress, 1st Session (1955). 36 See Co......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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