Indiana Harbor Belt R. Co. v. Industrial Scrap Corp.
| Decision Date | 11 June 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 85 C 9740.,85 C 9740. |
| Citation | 672 F. Supp. 1041 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
| Parties | INDIANA HARBOR BELT RAILROAD COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. INDUSTRIAL SCRAP CORPORATION, Defendant. INDUSTRIAL SCRAP CORPORATION, Counter-Plaintiff, v. INDIANA HARBOR BELT RAILROAD COMPANY, Counter-Defendant. |
Anna M. Kelly, Indiana Harbor Belt R.R., Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff.
Steven C. Weiss, Ronald M. Hill, Margaret Muller Wilson, Steven C. Weiss & Assoc., Chicago, Ill., for defendant.
In this action, plaintiff and counter-defendant Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Company ("IHB") has moved to strike defendant and counter-plaintiff Industrial Scrap Corporation's ("Industrial Scrap") affirmative defenses and to dismiss Count II of Industrial Scrap's counterclaim. For the reasons set forth in this memorandum opinion and order, IHB's motions are denied.
On November 21, 1985, IHB filed suit against Industrial Scrap charging that between June 1, 1984 and September 1, 1985, Industrial Scrap had stored certain freight cars on IHB's property. IHB alleges that under Demurrage and Storage Tariff PHJ 6004-N, Item 2005, ("Tariff"), Industrial Scrap owes IHB $82,170 for storage of those freight cars. IHB states further that, despite a demand for payment by IHB, Industrial Scrap has refused to pay the storage charges.
In response to IHB's complaint, Industrial Scrap has raised four affirmative defenses, only two of which are at issue here. Industrial Scrap's first affirmative defense provides:
The rates and/or charges which INDIANA HARBOR BELT RAILROAD COMPANY has assessed and is attempting to collect herein (1) are unjust and unreasonable and in violation of 49 U.S. C. 10701(a) of the Interstate Commerce Act; (2) constitute an unreasonable practice in violation of Section 10701(a) of the said Act; and (3) constitute a discriminatory practice in violation of Section 107(a) and (b) of the said Act.
Industrial Scrap's third affirmative defense provides:
Demurrage and Storage Tariff PHJ 6004-N and Item 2005 of said tariff are ambiguous and should be construed against INDIANA HARBOR BELT RAILROAD COMPANY and in favor of INDUSTRIAL SCRAP CORPORATION.
In addition, Industrial Scrap has also filed a two count counterclaim against IHB. In Count II of its counterclaim, Industrial Scrap alleges that it has already paid $92,730 in storage charges to IHB under the tariff. Industrial Scrap asserts that the storage charges are unjust and unreasonable, and constitute unreasonable and discriminatory practices under the Interstate Commerce Act. 49 U.S.C. §§ 10701(a), 10741(a), (b). Industrial Scrap requests damages in the amount already paid in storage charges.
IHB has moved to strike Industrial Scrap's first affirmative defense and to dismiss Count II of Industrial Scrap's counterclaim. IHB argues that whether the storage charges are unjust and unreasonable or constitute unreasonable and discriminatory practices are all matters within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission ("ICC"). Further, the ICC is the only body that has the authority to grant the relief requested by Industrial Scrap in Count II of its counterclaim.
The ICC has primary jurisdiction over issues such as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Advance-United Expressways, Inc. v. CR Bard, Inc.
...Motor Carrier Audit Collection Co. v. Family Dollar Stores, Inc., 670 F.Supp. 644 (W.D.N.C.1987); Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Co. v. Industrial Scrap Corp., 672 F.Supp. 1041 (N.D.Ill.1986). As this court reads the Eleventh Circuit's ruling in Seaboard System, 794 F.2d 635, the courts in th......
-
Delta Traffic Service, Inc. v. Transtop, Inc.
... ... , 420 F.2d 385, 386-89 (8th Cir.1970); Indiana Harbor Belt R.R. Co. v. Industrial Scrap Corp., ... ...
-
North Penn Transfer, Inc. v. Victaulic Co. of America
...128, 110 S.Ct. at 2766 (a rate the ICC finds discriminatory is unlawful and unenforceable); see also Indiana H. B. R. Co. v. Industrial Scrap Corp., 672 F.Supp. 1041, 1042 (N.D.Ill.1986) (unreasonableness and discriminatory nature of tariff appropriate affirmative defenses). The court, howe......
-
In re Total Transp., Inc.
...Audit Collection Co. v. Family Dollar Stores, Inc., 670 F.Supp. 644, 649-50 (W.D.N.C. 1987); Indiana Harbor Belt R.R. Co. v. Industrial Scrap Corp., 672 F.Supp. 1041, 1042 (N.D. Ill.1986); Maislin Transport Ltd. v. House of Wines, Inc., Civil No. 84-2831 (D.D.C. June 2, 1987) (available on ......