MALONEY

v.

HOLDEN, JUDGE

Citator

Cited By

• City OF Chicago v. United States, 396 U.S. 162 (U.S. 1969)
  …its order reads: “[T]he investigation proceedings [are] discontinued.” See Eastern Central Motor Carriers Assn. v. Baltimore & O. R. Co., 314 I. C. C. 5, 51. Such orders are reviewable. Cooper-Jarrett, Inc. v. United States, 226 F. Supp. 318, aff’d, 379 U. S. 6.…
• Houston Lighting & Power Co. v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n, 606 F.2d 1131 (D.C. Cir. 1979)
  …-haul movement.” Id. at 81, 584 F. 2d at 1062 citing Eastern Cent. Motor Carriers Ass’n. v. Baltimore & O. R., 314 I.C.C. 5, 45-47 (1961), complaint dismissed sub nom. Cooper-Jarrett, Inc., v. United States, 226 F.Supp. 318, 322-27 (W.D.Mo.), aff’d, 379 U.S. 6, 85 S.Ct. 49, 13 L.Ed.2d 21 (1964) (per curiam). In a similar vein, AEPC contests the failure of the carriers to offer a mileage allowance for shipper-furnished cars. We accept the Commission’s reasoning that such an allowance would be unjustified b…
• Potomac Elec. Power Co. v. United States & Interstate Commerce Comm'n, 584 F.2d 1058 (D.C. Cir. 1978)
  …addition, a partial service at a lower rate does not detract from the fact that a service in cars provided by the railroad was offered at a full rate. Cooper-Jarrett, Inc. v. United States, 226 F.Supp. 318, 323 (W.D. Mo.) (three-judge court), aff’d, 379 U.S. 6, 85 S.Ct. 49, 13 L.Ed.2d 21 (1964) (per cu-riam). In these circumstances, the railroad’s failure to hold out a complete unit-train service did not violate the Interstate Commerce Act. Moreover, a railroad’s obligation to furnish transportation is d…