US SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Appellant railroads sued to set aside an order of the Interstate Commerce Commission prescribing maximum carload rates for carrying certain kinds of fresh vegetables -- on the ground that they were "confiscatory," and therefore in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The sole basis for this charge was an allegation that, if put into effect, the rates would produce less money than it would cost the railroads to carry the particular vegetables covered by each rate.

Held: the suit was properly dismissed. Pp. 345 U. S. 147-150.

(a) Northern Pacific R. Co. v. North Dakota, 236 U. S. 585, and Norfolk & W. R. Co. v. West Virginia, 236 U. S. 605, distinguished. Pp. 345 U. S. 148-149.

(b) So long as rates as a whole afford railroads just compensation for their over-all services to the public, the Due Process Clause should not be construed as a bar to fixing noncompensatory rates for carrying some commodities when the public interest is thereby served. P. 345 U. S. 150.

105 F.Supp. 631 affirmed.

The District Court dismissed a suit to set aside a rate order of the Interstate Commerce Commission. 105 F.Supp. 631. On appeal to this Court, affirmed, p. 345 U. S. 150. chanrobles.com-red

Page 345 U. S. 147