Skip to Highlights
Highlights

TO ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 13. WHICH DUE TO WARTIME CONDITIONS WERE NOT EXPORTED FROM SUCH PART BUT WERE FORWARDED TO ANOTHER PORT AND THEN EXPORTED. WAS THE SUBJECT OF CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF THE CHESAPEAKE AND OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY V. THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT REMANDED THAT CASE TO THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AND A DETERMINATION ON THE FULL RECORD WHETHER THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN A REFERENCE TO THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION.

View Decision

B-126798, MAR. 12, 1957

TO ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 13, 1956, FILE 77-13437 11-43, REQUESTING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF THE DECISION OF APRIL 2, 1956, B- 126798, WHICH SUSTAINED THE ACTION OF OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION IN COLLECTING, THROUGH SETOFF ACTION, THE AMOUNT OF $2,308.47 ORIGINALLY PAID ON YOUR BILL NO. 77-13437-11/43 AS A PART OF THE CHARGES ALLEGED TO BE DUE FOR TRANSPORTING 14 SHIPMENTS OF TIN PLATE FROM INDIANA HARBOR, INDIANA, TO NEW YORK LIGHTERAGE, FOR EXPORT, IN MARCH 1942.

A SIMILAR SITUATION INVOLVING THE QUESTION OF THE REASONABLENESS OF DOMESTIC RATES ON SHIPMENTS FORWARDED TO THE PORT FOR EXPORT, WHICH DUE TO WARTIME CONDITIONS WERE NOT EXPORTED FROM SUCH PART BUT WERE FORWARDED TO ANOTHER PORT AND THEN EXPORTED, WAS THE SUBJECT OF CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF THE CHESAPEAKE AND OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY V. UNITED STATES, 224 F.2D. 443. IN AN OPINION, NO. 19, RENDERED DECEMBER 3, 1956, THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT REMANDED THAT CASE TO THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AND A DETERMINATION ON THE FULL RECORD WHETHER THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN A REFERENCE TO THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION. SEE, ALSO, IN THIS CONNECTION, THE DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT IN THE UNITED STATES V. THE WESTERN PACIFIC RAILROAD, DECIDED DECEMBER 3, 1956.

ACCORDINGLY, A FURTHER DECISION ON THE MATTER OF THE RATES TO BE APPLIED ON THESE SHIPMENTS MAY NOT BE RENDERED AT THIS TIME.

GAO Contacts