PUBLIC UTIL. COMMRS. v. Compania General

249 U.S. 425, 39 S. Ct. 332, 63 L. Ed. 687, 1919 U.S. LEXIS 2098
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedApril 14, 1919
Docket253
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 249 U.S. 425 (PUBLIC UTIL. COMMRS. v. Compania General) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
PUBLIC UTIL. COMMRS. v. Compania General, 249 U.S. 425, 39 S. Ct. 332, 63 L. Ed. 687, 1919 U.S. LEXIS 2098 (1919).

Opinion

249 U.S. 425 (1919)

BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSIONERS
v.
COMPANIA GENERAL DE TABACOS DE FILIPINAS.

No. 253.

Supreme Court of United States.

Submitted March 18, 1919.
Decided April 14, 1919.
APPEAL FROM AND ERROR TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS.

*426 Mr. Edward S. Bailey for appellant and plaintiff in error.

Mr. F.C. Fisher for appellee and defendant in error.

MR. JUSTICE VAN DEVANTER delivered the opinion of the court.

By a judgment rendered March 8, 1916, the court below annulled an order of the Board of Public Utility Commissioners of the Philippine Islands requiring a corporate common carrier to report annually various matters pertaining to its finances and operations, the ground of the judgment being that § 16 (e) of Act 2307 of the local legislature, under which the board acted, violated the organic law of the Philippines, c. 1369, 32 Stat. 691, in that it confided to the board the determination of what the reports should contain and therefore amounted to a delegation of legislative power. 34 Phil. Rep. 136. The board brought the judgment here for review, and the carrier now suggests that through a change in the local statute the question on which the judgment turned has become merely a moot one.

After the case was brought here the legislature, by Act 2694, so amended § 16 (e) as to cause the section itself to prescribe in detail what such reports should contain and thereby abrogated the provision on which the order was based and which the court held invalid. That provision therefore is no longer in force, and it is to the new provision that the board and carrier must give effect. Even if the original provision was valid, the order made under it became inoperative when the new provision was substituted in its place. Whether the order was based on a valid or an invalid statute consequently has become merely a moot question.

In this situation we are not called upon to consider the propriety of the judgment below, the proper course being, *427 as is shown by many precedents, to reverse the judgment and remand the cause with a direction that it be dismissed without costs to either party. United States v. Schooner Peggy, 1 Cranch, 103; New Orleans Flour Inspectors v. Glover, 160 U.S. 170, and 161 U.S. 101; Dinsmore v. Southern Express Co., 183 U.S. 115; United States v. Hamburg-Amerikanische Packetfahrt-Actien Gesellschaft, 239 U.S. 466; Berry v. Davis, 242 U.S. 468.

Judgment reversed. Cause to be dismissed without costs to either party.

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

Related

Finberg v. Sullivan
658 F.2d 93 (Third Circuit, 1981)
DeFunis v. Odegaard
529 P.2d 438 (Washington Supreme Court, 1974)
Acheson v. Droesse
197 F.2d 574 (D.C. Circuit, 1952)
Acheson, Secretary of State v. Droesse
197 F.2d 574 (D.C. Circuit, 1952)
Howard v. Wilbur
166 F.2d 884 (Sixth Circuit, 1948)
Bowles v. Bayview Manor Homes, Inc.
145 F.2d 618 (Fourth Circuit, 1944)
Western Electric Co. v. Cinema Supplies, Inc.
80 F.2d 111 (Eighth Circuit, 1935)
Kunze v. Auditorium Co.
52 F.2d 444 (Eighth Circuit, 1931)
Cohen v. Williams
16 F.2d 264 (First Circuit, 1926)
Boylston Nat. Bank of Boston v. Wainhouse
14 F.2d 385 (First Circuit, 1926)
Troy v. City of St. Paul
193 N.W. 726 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1923)
Payne v. Hearst
269 F. 678 (D.C. Circuit, 1920)
Dakota Coal Co. v. Fraser
267 F. 130 (Eighth Circuit, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
249 U.S. 425, 39 S. Ct. 332, 63 L. Ed. 687, 1919 U.S. LEXIS 2098, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/public-util-commrs-v-compania-general-scotus-1919.