ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC CO. ET AL.

v.

UNITED STATES ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Atchison v. Wichita Bd. of Trade, 412 U.S. 800 (U.S. 1973)
  …risdiction of the District Court to review the Commission’s order. See Atlantic City Electric Co. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 338 (SDNY 1969); Alabama Power Co. v. United States, 316 F. Supp. 337 (DC 1969), both aff’d by an equally divided court, 400 U. S. 73 (1970). Yet, although the parties have cited those [*815] cases to us, see Brief for the Interstate Commerce Commission 35; Brief for the Secretary of Agriculture 18; Brief for Wichita Board of Trade 32, they have not contended at any length that…
• Aberdeen & Rockfish R.R. Co. v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (scrap), 422 U.S. 289 (U.S. 1975)
  …Coal & Coke Co. v. United States, 11 F. Supp. 487 (ED Va. 1935), holding decisions of the ICC not to declare proposed increased rates unlawful in general revenue proceedings to be unreviewable. The court noted that this Court had divided evenly in 400 U. S. 73 (1970) in affirming Atlantic City Electric Co. v. United States, 306 F. Supp. 338 (SDNY 1969), and Alabama Power Co. v. United States, 316 F. Supp. 337 (DC 1970), and that the rule against reviewability of general revenue proceedings was therefore o…

  ← 1 / 4 →
• Nader v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 520 F.2d 182 (D.C. Cir. 1975)
  …tariff filing and instead filed tariff revisions designed to increase revenues by $250 million. . Arizona Grocery and the other ICC cases, Atlantic City Electric Co. v. United States, 306 F.Supp. 338 (S.D.N.Y.1969), aff’d by equally divided Court, 400 U.S. 73, 91 S.Ct. 259, 27 L.Ed.2d 212 (1970); Algoma Coal & Coke Co. v. United States, 11 F.Supp. 487 (E.D.Va.1935), are distinguishable for another reason, the peculiarities of ICC practice. Unlike the Federal Communications Commission, the Interstate Comm…