Legal Opinion
Detroit, Toledo and Ironton Railroad Company and Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company v. Consolidated Rail Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided January 24, 1984No. 82-1890PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LIVELY, Chief Judge.
The important question presented by this appeal is one of jurisdiction: Does the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC or Commission) have primary jurisdiction over an effort by a rail carrier to be relieved of the terms of a contract with a second rail carrier which established joint rates for joint routes? The district court determined that it was not required to defer to the ICC, “in what is basically a contract dispute.”
I
A
In December 1975 Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail) entered into identical agreements with a number of connecting railroads including the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Crowell v. BensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (SCRAP)Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
- United States v. Western Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Far East Conference v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- In Re Long Distance Telecommunications Litigation. Charles Kaplan v. itt-u.s. Transmission Systems, Inc., Roger Lee v. Western Union Telegraph CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1987
- Dan Barclay, Inc. v. Stewart & Stevenson Services, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1991
- County of Oakland v. City of Berkley, City of Madison HeightsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984
- Bruss Co. v. Allnet Communication Services, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1985
- United States v. Joey HaunCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.