Interstate Commerce Commission v. Transcon Lines, et al. (513 U.S. 138)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 10, 1995 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 513 U.S. 138 · 115 S. Ct. 689
- Decided
- January 10, 1995
- Term
- October Term 1994
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Kennedy
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court. Though recent Acts of Congress have made substantial changes in the regulation of interstate motor carriers, see Negotiated Rates Act of 1993, 107 Stat. 2044; Trucking Industry Regulatory Reform Act of 1994, 108 Stat. 1683, this case arises under the law in effect before those enactments. We address once again the Interstate Commerce Act’s filed rate requirements, 49 U. S. C. §§ 10761(a), 10762(a)(1), and their bearing on the authority of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to enforce related provisions of the Act and regulations adopted under it. Under the filed rate doctrine applicable to the transactions here in question, motor carriers were required to publish their shipping rates in tariffs filed with the ICC and to receive only the published rates. Ibid. Our cases have taught the necessity of strict compliance with this scheme. E. g., Maislin Industries, U. S., Inc. v. Primary Steel, Inc., 497 U. S. 116 (1990); Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. Maxwell, 237 U. S. 94, 97 (1915). The question now presented is whether the filed rate doctrine bars the ICC from obtaining injunctive relief to enforce its credit regulations in a manner that would prevent collection of a rate filed in a published tariff. We hold that the filed rate doctrine does not bar the injunction the ICC seeks. I Transcon Lines (Transcon) was once the…
Excerpt of a 19,036-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.