Mississippi Railroad Commission v. Mobile & O. R. Co.

• Citation: 123 So. 876,154 Miss. 871
• Decision Date: 07 October 1929
• Docket Number: 27479
• Parties: MISSISSIPPI RAILROAD COMMISSION et al. v. MOBILE & O. R. CO. et al
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi

123 So. 876

154 Miss. 871

MISSISSIPPI RAILROAD COMMISSION et al. v. MOBILE & O. R. CO. et al

No. 27479

Supreme Court of Mississippi

October 7, 1929

Division A

APPEAL from chancery court of Hinds county, First district, HON. V J. STRICKER, Chancellor.

Suit by the Mobile & Ohio Railroad, Company and another against the Mississippi Railroad Commission and others, to enjoin and have canceled an order of the Commission. From a decree for complainants, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Decree affirmed.

Rush H. Knox, Attorney-General, H. H. Elmore, of Cleveland, and F. J. Lotterhos, of Jackson, for appellants.

An order of the Railroad Commission fixing rates is legislative and cannot be enjoined unless it denies constitutional rights or is unreasonable in the technical sense.

Illinois Central R. R. Co. v. Mississippi R. R. Commission 109 So. 868; 10 C. J. 414, 434, 435, 436; 4 R. C. L. 628 629; 4 R. C. L. 630; 4 R. C. L. 653; Pennsylvania Co. v. United States, 236 U.S. 351, 59 L.Ed. 616; L. & N. R. Co. v. Garrett, 231 U.S. 298, 58 L.Ed. 229; Southern Pacific Co. v. Campbell, 230 U.S. 537, 57 L.Ed. 1610; Interstate Commerce Commission v. C., R. I. & P. Railroad Co., 218 U.S. 88, 54 L.Ed. 946; Detroit & M. Railroad Co. v. Michigan Railroad Commission, 203 F. 864; Homestead Co. v. Des Moines Electric Co., 248 F. 439.

If the sixty-eight cent rate is not now in effect, the appellees have a complete remedy at law if they should be sued for the difference in rates or for penalties and there is no jurisdiction for injunctive relief.

Western Union T. Co. v. Mississippi Railroad Commission, 74 Miss. 230, 21 So. 15; L. & N. Railroad Co. v. Railroad Commission (Fla.), 58 So. 543; Adams v. First National Bank, 103 Miss. 744, 60 So. 770; Illinois Central R. Co. v. Dodd, 105 Miss. 23, 61 So. 743; Adams v. City of Clarksdale, 95 Miss. 88, 48 So. 242; Portwood v. Feld, 72 Miss. 542, 17 So. 373.

The order complained of is a negative order commanding no action on the part of the appellees, and therefore, is not subject to injunction.

Prentiss v. Atlantic Coast Line Co., 211 U.S. 210, 53 L.Ed. 150; L. & N. Railroad Co. v. Garrett, 231 U.S. 298, 58 L.Ed. 229; Illinois Central Railroad v. Mississippi Railroad Commission, 109 So. 868; Proctor & Gamble Co. v. United States, 225 U.S. 282, 56 L.Ed. 1091; Lehigh Valley Railroad Co. v. United States, 243 U.S. 412, 61 L.Ed. 819; Manufacturers Railway Co. v. United States, 246 U.S. 457, 62 L.Ed. 831; Hooker v. Knapp, 225 U.S. 302, 56 L.Ed. 1099; Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co. v. United States, 264 U.S. 258, 68 L.Ed. 667; Interstate Commerce Commission v. United States, 260 U.S. 32, 67 L.Ed. 112; Fort Smith L. & T. Co. v. Bourland, 267 U.S. 330, 69 L.Ed. 631.

Even if the court has jurisdiction to enjoin said order yet the appellees have not made a sufficient showing to justify an exercise of the court's power.

4 R. C. L. 632, 633; Illinois Central R. R. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 206 U.S. 441, 51 L.Ed. 1128; Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 52 L.Ed. 714; East Tennessee R. R. Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 181 U.S. 1, 45 L.Ed. 719; Illinois Central R. R. Co. v. Mississippi R. R. Commission, 116 Miss. 484, 77 So. 314; Simpson v. Shepherd, 230 U.S. 352, 57 L.Ed. 1511; Mississippi R. R. Commission v. M. & O. R. R. Company, 115 Miss. 101, 75 So. 778; Newton v. Consolidated Gas Co., 258 U.S. 165, 66 L.Ed. 538; Interstate Commerce Commission v. Union Pacific R. Co., 222 U.S. 541, 56 L.Ed. 308; Laurel Cotton Mills v. G. & S. I. Railroad Co., 84 Miss. 339, 37 So. 134; Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Interstate Commerce Commission, 162 U.S. 197, 40 L.Ed. 940; Meridian Traffic Bureau v. Columbus & Greenville Railway Co., No. 18212, before the Interstate Commerce Commission (decided Dec. 6, 1927); Young Heading Co. v. Payne, 127 Miss. 48, 89 So. 782; 32 C. J. 51; 5 Pomeroy's Equity Jurisprudence, sec. 323.

R. C. Beckett, of St. Louis, Mo., for appellee.

The court had jurisdiction to enjoin the enforcement of an order of the Mississippi Railroad Commission fixing rates.

Railroad Co. v. Adams, 85 Miss. 772, 28 So. 348; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Kennedy, 110 Miss. 73, 69 So. 674; Forrest County v. Melton et al., 123 Miss. 615, 86 So. 369; Cumberland Tel. Co. v. Potter, 135 Miss. 835, 100 So. 378; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Railroad Commission, 74 Miss. 80; Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 52 L.Ed. 714, 13 L. R. A. (N. S.) 932; Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. Tucker, 230 U.S. 340, 57 L.Ed. 1510; Mississippi Railroad Commission v. M. & O. Railroad Co., 115 Miss. 101, 75 So. 778; Mississippi Railroad Commission v. Mobile & Ohio Railroad Co., 117 Miss. 257, 78 So. 153; Mississippi Railroad Commission v. Mobile & Ohio R. R. Co., 244 U.S. 388; Mississippi Railroad Com. v. Illinois Central R. R. Co., 203 U.S. 335; C., M. & St. P. R. R. v. Wisconsin, 238 U.S. 491; Young Heading Co. v. Paine, 127 Miss. 64, 89 So. 782; Stone v. Railroad Co., 62 Miss. 646; 4 Ruling Case Law, page 651; 4 R. C. L. 656; Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co. v. Trammel, 287 F. 741; 10 C. J. 434 to 437.

The order is void on account of being unsupported by any evidence and therefore arbitrary and without due process of law.

Interstate Commerce Commission v. L. & N. Railroad Co., 227 U.S. 88; Northern Pacific Co. v. Washington, 268 U.S. 39, l. c. 45; Chicago Junction Case, 264 U.S. 258, 263; Interstate Commerce Commission v. Union Pacific R. R., 222 U.S. 541, 547; New York & Queens Gas Co. v. McCall, 245 U.S. 345, 348.

The order is an attempt to establish an unreasonable low rate and if enforced would result in taking complainant's property without due process of law.

Public Utilities Commission of Illinois v. Railroad Co., 278 Ill. 58, 115 N.E. 904; I. C. Railroad Co. v. Railroad Commission of Ky., 1 F.2d 805 (Oct. 15, 1924); I. C. C. v. L. & N. Railroad Co., 227 U.S. 88, 93; L. & N. R. R. Co. v. U.S. 245 U.S. 466.

The order is illegal because of unfair discrimination against these complainant railroad companies and, if enforced, would deny them the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.

State v. L. & N. Railroad Co., 72 So. 494; Southern Railway Co. v. Alabama Public Service Commission, 97 So. 289; Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co. v. Trammel, 287 F. 741 (U. S.D. C. Georgia, 1923); State v. M. K. & T. Railway Co., 262 Mo. 507, 172 S.W. 35, L. R. A. 1915C, 778, Ann. Cas. 1916E, 949; State v. Railroad Co., 118 Minn. 380, Ann. Cas. 1913E, 494, 137 N.W. 2, 41 L. R. A. (N. S.) 524; Public Utilities Commission of Illinois v. Railroad Co., 278. Ill. 58, 115 N.E. 904; Lake Shore & M. S. Ry. Co. v. Smith, 173 U.S. 684, 690, 695.

Gardner, Odom & Gardner, of Greenwood, for appellee.

Courts will enjoin enforcement of Railroad Commission's order fixing rates, if they are confiscatory or deny the carrier the protection of laws.

Mississippi Railroad Commission v. M & O. Railroad Co., 115 Miss. 101; Mississippi Railroad Commission v. Mobile & Ohio R. R. Co., 117 Miss. 257; Mississippi Railroad Commission v. Mobile & Ohio Railroad Co., 244 U.S. 388; Mississippi Railroad Commission v. Illinois Central R. R. Co., 203 U.S. 335; C., M. & St. P. R. R. Co. v. Wisconsin, 238 U.S. 491.

A Railroad Commission cannot pass order effect of which produces plain discrimination in transportation rates.

Young Heading Co. v. Payne, 127 Miss. 48; 127 Miss. pages 63 and 64.

It is essential to a judgment that it should appear to be the sentence or adjudication of a court or judicial tribunal and to be the judicial act of the court as such or of the judge or magistrate who holds or presides in such court.

23 Cyc. 668.

A special rate, is a voluntary rate, like an excursion rate, and no commission has any right to fix a special rate or a voluntary rate for a railroad company without its consent.

State v. L. & N. Railroad Co., 72 So. 494, 495, 496.

Acts 1907, p. 40, sec. 14 1/2, giving the Railroad Commission authority to permit common carriers to establish special rates for the transportation of specific commodities in carloads from specified points or within specified zones, does not authorize the Railroad Commission of its own motion to establish special rates or require the continuance of a special rate, but only to approve special rates submitted by a carrier, who may withdraw them at will.

Carriers Cent. Dig., sections 7, 15-20; Dec. Dig. 12 (1), 72 So. 494; R. R. Miller Mill Co. v. L. & N. R. R. Co., 92 So. 797.

Equity has jurisdiction to enjoin the multiplicity of continuing actions, particularly if they be vexatious.

Griffith's Chancery Practice, sec. 439, et seq., 58 Miss. 84; 61 Miss. 293; 65 Miss. 391; 81 Miss. 257; 83 Miss. 708; 111 Miss. 36.

OPINION

COOK, J.

The appellees, the Mobile & Ohio Railroad Company and the Columbus & Greenville Railway Company, filed an original bill of complaint in the chancery court of Hinds county against the Mississippi Railroad Commission, seeking to enjoin and have canceled a certain order of the said commission. A temporary injunction was granted, and thereafter a demurrer to the bill of complaint was sustained. An amended bill was then filed, and upon the overruling of a demurrer thereto, an answer was filed, and upon the trial of the cause a final decree was entered in favor of appellees enjoining the commission from enforcing or attempting to enforce said order or publishing or giving certified copies thereof; and from the collection or imposition of penalties because of the breach of said order; and declaring the order to be null and void; and from this decree the Railroad Commission prosecuted this appeal.

The material facts involved in this cause as gleaned from the pleadings, and the uncontroverted proof in support thereof are, in...