|
Thurston Motor Lines, Inc. v. Jordan K. Rand, Ltd., 460 U.S. 533 (1983)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Thurston Motor Lines, Inc. v. Jordan K. Rand, Ltd., 460 U.S. 533 (1983)
Per curiam opinion.
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner is a common carrier authorized by the Interstate Commerce Commission to transport commodities. When respondent allegedly failed to pay $661.41 in motor freight charges, petitioner filed suit in United States District Court. Its complaint alleged that respondent failed to pay for transport services as required by petitioner’s tariffs on file with the Commission. The complaint also alleged that the action arose under the Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C. § 10741(a) (1976 ed., Supp. V), and that the District Court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1337.
The District Court dismissed the matter for want of subject matter jurisdiction, and the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed. 682 F.2d 811 (1982). Characterizing the suit as a "simple contract-collection action," the court could not "discern any proposition of federal law that a court need confront in deciding what, if anything, can be recovered." Id. at 812.
Under the Interstate Commerce Act, as construed by this Court, the Court of Appeals was in error. In Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. Rice, 247 U.S. 201 (1918), this Court squarely held that federal question jurisdiction existed over a suit to recover $145 allegedly due the carrier for an interstate shipment under tariffs regulated by the Interstate Commerce Act.
The Interstate Commerce Act requires carrier to collect and consignee to pay all lawful charges duly prescribed by the tariff in respect of every shipment. Their duty and obligation grow out of and depend upon that act.
Id. at 202. Other federal courts have had no difficulty in following the clear import of Rice.See Madler v. Artoe, 494 F.2d 323 (CA7 1974); Bernstein Bros. Pipe & Machinery Co. v. Denver & R. G. W. R. Co., 193 F.2d 441 (CA10 1951); Maritime Service Corp. v. Sweet Brokerage De Puerto Rico, Inc., 537 F.2d 560 (CA1 1976).
The Court of Appeals’ attempt to distinguish this "most troublesome precedent" is wholly unconvincing. In its view, Rice turned upon the fact that the carrier billed the shipper for an additional amount that, while authorized by lawful tariffs, was contrary to the parties’ understanding.
Perhaps unsure of its distinction of Rice, the Court of Appeals went on to "doubt that Rice is still good law." Needless to say, only this Court may overrule one of its precedents. Until that occurs, Rice is the law, and the decision below cannot be reconciled with it. The petition for certiorari is granted, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded to that court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
So ordered.
Per curiam opinion. (Footnotes)
* In Rice, the parties had an understanding requiring the carrier to assess all charges immediately upon the delivery of livestock. This arrangement allowed the shipper to include the transportation costs in the price at which the livestock was sold. The dispute resulted from the carrier’s billing the shipper after the delivery and sale of the livestock for an additional $145 to cover disinfecting the freight cars. This additional charge complied with lawful tariffs.
Contents:
Chicago:
U.S. Supreme Court, "Thurston Motor Lines, Inc. v. Jordan K. Rand, Ltd., 460 U.S. 533 (1983)," Thurston Motor Lines, Inc. v. Jordan K. Rand, Ltd., 460 U.S. 533 (1983) in 460 U.S. 533 460 U.S. 534–460 U.S. 533astS. Original Sources, accessed July 10, 2025, http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9HCCA5SCQSSYCG4.
MLA:
U.S. Supreme Court. "Thurston Motor Lines, Inc. v. Jordan K. Rand, Ltd., 460 U.S. 533 (1983)." Thurston Motor Lines, Inc. v. Jordan K. Rand, Ltd., 460 U.S. 533 (1983), in 460 U.S. 533, pp. 460 U.S. 534–460 U.S. 533astS. Original Sources. 10 Jul. 2025. http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9HCCA5SCQSSYCG4.
Harvard:
U.S. Supreme Court, 'Thurston Motor Lines, Inc. v. Jordan K. Rand, Ltd., 460 U.S. 533 (1983)' in Thurston Motor Lines, Inc. v. Jordan K. Rand, Ltd., 460 U.S. 533 (1983). cited in 1983, 460 U.S. 533, pp.460 U.S. 534–460 U.S. 533astS. Original Sources, retrieved 10 July 2025, from http://www.originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9HCCA5SCQSSYCG4.
|