Shelby Biscuit Co. v. United States

S.D. Texas

Shelby Biscuit Co. v. United States

255 F. Supp. 475, 1966 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8267

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Texas

DecidedJune 24, 1966

DocketCiv. A. No. 13645

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 255 F. Supp. 475 (Shelby Biscuit Co. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Shelby Biscuit Co. v. United States, 255 F. Supp. 475, 1966 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8267 (S.D. Tex. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

In this three-Judge proceeding to set aside the 1960 ICC order in Docket No. MC-C-2520, Shelby Biscuit Company, Investigation of Operations, 84 M.C.C. 131, the question is whether the sugar activities constitute unauthorized transportation, 49 U.S.C.A. §§ 306(a), 309(a), or permissible private carriage, 49 U.S. C.A. §§ 303(a) (17), 303(c). The Report shows that for both legal standards and factual comparability, the ICC relied on its decision in Emma Shannon, Investigation of Operations, 81 M.C.C. 337 (1959). That decision was, however, set aside by the District Court, Shannon v. United States, W.D.Tex., 1963, 219 F. Supp. 781, affirmed in Red Ball Motor Freight, Inc. v. Shannon, 1964, 377 U.S. 311, 84 S.Ct. 1260, 12 L.Ed.2d 341, by a full opinion which declared a number of significant principles. As we think that in this generally troublesome area we must be certain that the agency has evaluated the record in the light of the correct standards, we vacate the order [476]*476and remand it for further hearing, consideration, and report. S. E. C. v. Chenery Corp., 1947, 332 U.S. 194, 67 S.Ct. 1575, 1760, 91 L.Ed. 1995. Other than to state that the present record may be used and that the Court has the impression that much more factual information will be helpful, if not required, we do not undertake to blue print the proceedings on remand. This we leave initially to the considered discretion of the ICC.

Vacated and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM:

In this three-Judge proceeding to set aside the 1960 ICC order in Docket No. MC-C-2520, Shelby Biscuit Company, Investigation of Operations, 84 M.C.C. 131, the question is whether the sugar activities constitute unauthorized transportation, 49 U.S.C.A. §§ 306(a), 309(a), or permissible private carriage, 49 U.S. C.A. §§ 303(a) (17), 303(c). The Report shows that for both legal standards and factual comparability, the ICC relied on its decision in Emma Shannon, Investigation of Operations, 81 M.C.C. 337 (1959). That decision was, however, set aside by the District Court, Shannon v. United States, W.D.Tex., 1963, 219 F. Supp. 781, affirmed in Red Ball Motor Freight, Inc. v. Shannon, 1964, 377 U.S. 311, 84 S.Ct. 1260, 12 L.Ed.2d 341, by a full opinion which declared a number of significant principles. As we think that in this generally troublesome area we must be certain that the agency has evaluated the record in the light of the correct standards, we vacate the order [476]*476and remand it for further hearing, consideration, and report. S. E. C. v. Chenery Corp., 1947, 332 U.S. 194, 67 S.Ct. 1575, 1760, 91 L.Ed. 1995. Other than to state that the present record may be used and that the Court has the impression that much more factual information will be helpful, if not required, we do not undertake to blue print the proceedings on remand. This we leave initially to the considered discretion of the ICC.

Vacated and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 F. Supp. 475, 1966 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8267, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shelby-biscuit-co-v-united-states-txsd-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack