Legal Opinion
Archer Daniels Midland Co. v. United States
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided July 16, 1969No. 4-68 Civ. 166PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NEVILLE, District Judge.
Five railroads,1 operating between Omaha, Nebraska, the Twin Cities (Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota area,) and Chicago, Illinois filed and published tariff schedules, permitting what is called “milling-in-transit” privilege at the Twin Cities for wheat shipped on a through rate of 32.5 cents per cwt. from Omaha to Chicago. The transit privilege permits wheat shipped from Omaha2 through Chicago to points east of the Illinois-Indiana border under a tariff rate of 32.5 cents per cwt. to Chicago to be stopped and unloaded at the intermediate point of the Twin Cities,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- United States v. Western Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Great Northern Railway Co. v. Merchants Elevator Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Mississippi Valley Barge Line Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Illinois Central Railroad v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Board of Trade of Kansas City v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Mobil Alaska Pipeline Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977
- Mobil Alaska Pipeline Company v. United States of America and the Interstate Commerce Commission, and Sohio Pipe Line Company, Amerada Hess Pipeline Corporation, Union Alaska Pipeline Company, Intervening State of Alaska and Arctic Slope Regional Corporation, Intervening Bp Pipelines Inc. v. United States of America and the Interstate Commerce Commission, Exxon Pipeline Company v. United States of America and the Interstate Commerce Commission, and Union Alaska Pipeline Company, Intervening Arco Pipe Line Company v. United States of America and the Interstate Commerce Commission, State of Alaska, InterveningCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977