Soo Line Railroad v. United States

625 F.2d 183
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMarch 17, 1980
DocketNo. 79-1667
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 625 F.2d 183 (Soo Line Railroad v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Soo Line Railroad v. United States, 625 F.2d 183 (8th Cir. 1980).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Soo Line Railroad Company (Soo Line) appeals a decision of the Interstate Commerce Commission which denied the railroad’s application for abandonment of approximately 30 miles of branch line. Soo Line’s application sought the abandonment of 50 miles of branch line located in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that public convenience and necessity required abandonment of approximately 20 miles of the line but required continued operation on the balance of the line. Division 1 of the ICC affirmed and adopted the ALJ’s findings with slight modification. No. AB-57 (Sub-No. 7), Soo Line Railroad Company-Abandonment Between Baraga (Baraga County) and Calument and Lake Linden (Houghton County), Michigan, decided June 7, 1979.

The ICC found that even if Soo Line’s avoidable annual loss on the branch line was $123,400, as claimed by the railroad, full abandonment would not be authorized based on the “severe impact” to the area. Division 1 also noted that this burden was being placed on “a successful and financially sound railroad.” However, the Commission in considering the burden placed on Soo Line specifically refused to consider “valuation of [the line’s] assets” (opportunity costs) and “evidence relating to reproduction costs.” Consideration of opportunity costs would, according to Soo Line, double the avoidable annual loss incurred by it in the operation of this branch line.

Recently, this court held in Missouri Pacific Railroad v. United States, 625 F.2d 178 (8th Cir. 1980) that the ICC should consider “opportunity costs” and should use replacement value rather than book value when evaluating abandonment applications. Therefore, we remand this case to Division 1 of the ICC for reconsideration consistent with this court’s opinion in Missouri Pacific Railroad v. United States, supra.

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

Related

Soo Line Railroad Company v. United States
625 F.2d 183 (Eighth Circuit, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
625 F.2d 183, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/soo-line-railroad-v-united-states-ca8-1980.