Ajayem Lumber Corp. v. Penn Central Transportation Co.

Second Circuit

Ajayem Lumber Corp. v. Penn Central Transportation Co.

496 F.2d 21

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMarch 29, 1974

DocketNos. 843, 848, Dockets 72-2123, 72-2189

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 496 F.2d 21 (Ajayem Lumber Corp. v. Penn Central Transportation Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ajayem Lumber Corp. v. Penn Central Transportation Co., 496 F.2d 21 (2d Cir. 1974).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Long Island Rail Road Company petitions for clarification of our order of November 7, 1973, with respect to the measure of damages which the Long Island is entitled to recover.

In the absence of some showing to the contrary, it would appear that the Long Island is entitled to any net revenue reduction caused by the increased joint rates to which it objected. In order to recover the Long Island would have to show the reduction in traffic attributable to the new rates and the revenue it would have realized on the lost traffic if the rates had not been increased over its objection. Offset against this amount would be the increased revenue realized by the Long Island as a result of the increased rates and the reduction in expenses occasioned by its handling of a reduced volume of business.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Long Island Rail Road Company petitions for clarification of our order of November 7, 1973, with respect to the measure of damages which the Long Island is entitled to recover.

In the absence of some showing to the contrary, it would appear that the Long Island is entitled to any net revenue reduction caused by the increased joint rates to which it objected. In order to recover the Long Island would have to show the reduction in traffic attributable to the new rates and the revenue it would have realized on the lost traffic if the rates had not been increased over its objection. Offset against this amount would be the increased revenue realized by the Long Island as a result of the increased rates and the reduction in expenses occasioned by its handling of a reduced volume of business.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

496 F.2d 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ajayem-lumber-corp-v-penn-central-transportation-co-ca2-1974.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack