Page images
PDF
EPUB

INDEX DIGEST

ABANDONMENT. See CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY (Revocation of Cer-

tificates); OPERATION; ROUTES.
AFFIDAVITS. Admission of affidavits of shippers as proof of “grandfather"
operation was refused, since it would deprive protestants of opportunity to
cross-examine. Tower Trucking Co., Inc., Contr. Car. Applic., 399 (401).
AGENTS. See BROKERS (Definition, etc.); SAVING CLAUSES (Bona Fide

Operation).
AGREEMENTS. See EMPLOYEES OF CARRIERS.
ALL-COMMODITY RATES. See also PROPORTIONAL RATES. Defendants'
all-commodity rates, the same as complainant's rates on more restricted list,
were not unlawful when no reason was shown for requiring defendants to limit
their rates to articles on which complainant's rates applied. Intermountain-
Coast Motor Frt. Tariff Bur. v. Sims, 589 (596).

Proposed all-commodity 1. t. I. rates between Chicago, St. Louis, and Kansas
City, and Omaha, Salt Lake City, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, to alternate
with forwarder-competitive rates when lower charge would result, were reasonable
when they would fill a gap in existing competitive basis; and rail-competitive
rate from Chicago to Pacific Northwest on 30,000-pound minimum was reasonable
when it would yield compensatory truck-mile earnings. All Freight, Midwestern
States and California-Utah, 612 (614).

Since rail all-commodity rates have been found not to contravene classification
requirements of sec. 1 (6), motor all-commodity rates do not violate similar pro-
visions of sec. 216 (b). Intermountain-Coast Motor Frt. Tariff Bur. v. Sims, 589
(594); Middlewest Motor Frt. Bur. v. Schaffer, 368 (371).
ALTERNATIVE RATES. Proposed alternating bases of rates on carrier's
authorized commodities, one a set of distance scales and the other consisting of
specific commodity rates, both on quantity minima, the basis providing the lower
rate to apply, found justified with exception of certain specific rates found un-
reasonably low. Miscellaneous Commodities Within Midwestern Territory, 597
(598).
ANY-QUANTITY RATES. See EARNINGS; PACKING; RATE COMPARISONS.
APPLICATIONS. See Common CONTROL, ETC.; ISSUES.
ASSOCIATIONS. See PARTIES.
BANKRUPTCY. See CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY (Certificates); Saving

CLAUSES (Interruption of Service).
BILLS OF LADING. See CLASSIFICATION (PROPERTY (Parts)); SAVING CLAUSES

(Scope, etc.).
BONA FIDE OPERATION. See EQUIPMENT (Lease); SAVING CLAUSES.
BREAK-DOWN RATES. See QUANTITY RATES.
BROKERS. DEFINITION AND TESTS OF STATUS: Arranging for transportation
of goods of customers of applicants' warehouse or local cartage service, without
separate charge, was not brokerage. Lynch Transfer & Stor. Co. Com. Car. Applic.,
411 (417).
42 M. C. C.

957

Applicants which, as agents of booking association of which they were members,
solicited and registered shipments and for a fee turned them over to the association
for transportation by others, were not brokers, since they had relinquished control
over selection of the actual carriers. Hillier Stor. Co. Com. Car. Applic., 185 (190);
Lynch Transfer & Stor. Co. Com. Car. Applic., 411 (414).

LICENSES: Denial: Interstate Van Lines, Inc., Com. Car. Applic., 663; Lynch
Transfer & Stor. Co. Com. Car. Applic., 411.

QUALIFICATIONS: Any circumstance which obligates a broker to favor one
carrier over others destroys free exercise of discretion to make the most favorable
arrangements for the general public. License denied applicant whose president
was a partner in a carrier with extensive operating rights. Interstate Van Lines,
Inc., Com. Car. Applic., 663 (670).
BURDEN OF PROOF. See also CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY; DIVISIONS OF
Rates; EQUIPMENT (Lease); INVESTIGATION AND SUSPENSION. All parties are
expected to make available all relevant facts within their knowledge, irrespective
of where the burden of proof rests. Christianson and Green Revocation of Cer-
tificate, 238 (239).
CARRIER STATUS. See EQUIPMENT (Lease); SAVING CLAUSES (Bona Fide

Operation).
CERTIFICATES. See CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY; EXEMPTIONS; INTER-

MEDIATE POINTS.
CHARTER OPERATIONS. See PASSENGERS.
CLASSIFICATION OF CARRIERS. See CoMMODITIES (Scope of Operation);

CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY (Certificates); ROUTES (Regular vs. Irregular);
SAVING CLAUSES (Routes, Scope); and Definition under COMMON, CONTRACT,

and PRIVATE CARRIERS.
CLASSIFICATION (PROPERTY). See also ALL-COMMODITY RATES; Com-

MODITIES (Description); PACKING.

COMMODITIES: Ratings on the following commodities were prescribed or ap-
proved: Alcoholic liquors and wines: 241; Couches, metal: 99 (102); Rivets: 716.

EXCEPTIONS: In determining lawful exceptions ratings, transportation charac-
teristics of the commodity and ratings on related commodities must be
considered. Rating higher than classification basis was reasonable for light-
weight war-model bicycles when like rating had been approved on commodities
of comparable density and value. Bicycles from Westfield, Mass., to New England
and East, 442 (446).

An exception rating may be established when transportation characteristics of
an article in a particular area differ substantially from those of similar articles
generally, or in other special circumstances. Otherwise, ratings higher than the
governing classification should not be established. If the general classification
is too low, it should be changed. Classifications in Middle Atlantic States, 716
(719, 720);

-Ratings above classification basis on ribbon-winding spools and plate bands
in trunk-line territory were not justified without showing that similar articles were
not made in other sections of the country or that transportation characteristics of
the considered articles differed substantially from those made elsewhere. Id. (719).

Parts: Under rule 16 of national classification, the rating for a complete article
applies to a shipment of substantially all parts thereof on one bill of lading, and
omission of one or more parts is immaterial unless it alters the fundamental char-
acter of the article from a transportation or tariff standpoint. Electrical Prod-
ucts Corp. v. Consolidated Copperstate Lines, 103 (105);

-But lower rates on parts may not be applied unless they are shipped
on separate bills of lading. Separate listing on one shipping document does not
remove application of the rule. Id. (106).

Rate on neon electric signs applied on shipment of separately packaged parts,
all listed on one paid freight bill, when presumption that they were shipped on
one bill of lading was not rebutted. Id. (105).

REASONABLENESS: See also Moor Cases. As rating on radio cabinets was
based on characteristics of types transported by truck, and some weighed more per
cubic foot than others, it was properly predicated on average density of shipments.
Emerson Radio & Phonograph Corp. v. Seaboard Frt. Lines, 419 (423).

Lawfulness of classification of an article depends on its transportation charac-
teristics and cannot be determined by comparison of truck-mile earnings with
average on all traffic. Classifications in Middle Atlantic States, 716 (719).
CLASS RATES. See MINIMUM WEIGHTS (Factor in Rates); RATE COMPARISONS

(Rail with Motor).
COMMODITIES. DESCRIPTION: Ratings on articles specifically indexed in
classifications are frequently provided by reference to generic descriptions, and
rating on "Cabinets, n. o. i. b. n., other than furniture,” was inapplicable to radio
cabinets indexed with reference to higher-rated description “Furniture and Fur-
niture Parts, n. 0. i. b. n.” Emerson Radio & Phonograph Corp. v. Seaboard Frt.
Lines, Inc., 419 (420).

"Iron and steel products" is a generic description, and rate tariff should list
articles included. Miscellaneous Commodities Within Midwestern Territory,
597 (603).

SCOPE OF OPERATION: See also HOUSEHOLD GOODS; OPERATION (Abandon-
ment); SAVING CLAUSES. Authority for contract carriage of merchandise dealt
in by wholesale, retail, and chain grocery and food concerns, and supplies, etc.,
used in their business, was more precise than general-commodity authority and
broad enough to include every article applicant had transported, even though
they could be designated general commodities. However, authority granted
should not be construed to mean general commodities, as applicant rendered a
special type of service which should be classified according to the class of persons
served as well as the commodities transported. McAteer Contr. Car. Applic.,
35 (46).

As the frozen-vegetable business had only recently developed, grant of exten-
sion authority to carrier transporting frozen fruits in refrigerated equipment, for
transportation of frozen vegetables between the same points, was warranted.
McCann Com. Car. Applic., 61 (71).
COMMODITY RATES. JUSTIFICATION: Proposed commodity rates on mineral
wool from South Plainfield, N. J., to New England, found reasonable when class
rates were on New England territorial level, and South Plainfield shipper could
not compete at such rates with other N. J. producers accorded lower middle-
Atlantic basis. Mineral Wool, South Plainfield, N. J., to Conn., Mass., and
R. I., 689 (691).

LESS THAN TRUCKLOAD: Reduced I. t. 1. commodity rates on fruit juices and
flavoring compounds from Columbus, Ga., to the Southwest, the same as motor
and rail rates on flavoring sirup, found justified when their transportation char-
acteristics were equally favorable. Juices, Flavoring Compounds, Columbus
Ga., to Southwest, 87.

Alternating 1. t. I. commodity rate on boots and shoes from transcontinental
group A points to Pacific coast, established to meet forwarder competition and
lower than normal group A rate, found not unreasonable when it appeared com-
pensatory and compared favorably with transcontinental 1. t. I. rates on numerous
articles. Boots and Shoes from Boston, Hartford, and New York, 90.

Where commodity rates are maintained on many articles, it is proper to compare
1. t. l. commodity rates on those similarly rated in the classification. Id. (93).

Rates on wool, in l. t. 1. quantities subject to minimum of 3,000 pounds, from
Minn, and the Dakotas to Twin Cities, based on difference between rail-lake-
rail rates from Twin Cities and from primary origins to Boston, plus equivalent
of rail concentration and pick-up-and-delivery charges, approved for proportional
application when motor carriers could not compete with rail carriers on higher
basis. Basis 65 percent of first class prescribed for quantities less than 3,000
pounds. Wool to Twin Cities from Minn. points, 107 (116).
COMMON CARRIERS. See also CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY; FORWARDERS;

PRIVATE CARRIERS; SAVING CLAUSES; TRANSPORTATION.

DEFINITION AND TESTS OF Status: See also EQUIPMENT (Lease). Carrier
status is ordinarily determined by character of operations during entire period
from January 1, 1935, to the "grandfather" date. Overland Frt. Lines, Inc.,
Contr. Car. Applic., 261 (264).

While a holding out to serve the public is the basic distinction between common
and contract carriage, applicant's admission or disclaimer does not prove or dis-
prove a past holding out, which must be determined by subordinate tests, such as
number and frequency of contracts, character of commodities and service, regu-
larity of routes and schedules, uniformity of charges, etc., which tend to establish
or disprove specialization. Id. (264).

While tank-truck service is highly specialized, petroleum haulers were common
carriers when they solicited shipments from the general public, and their services
were not distinguishable in any important detail from those of other common
carriers. Certificate granted in lieu of permits previously issued. Nelson Bros.
Ext.—Texas-Colorado, 290 (294).

As forwarders deal with the general public, carriers who transport traffic ob-
tained through the forwarders' holding out are common carriers. Globe Cartage
Co., Inc., Com. Car. Applic., 547 (550).

QUALIFICATIONS: When applicant's successor had been found qualified in
finance proceeding to conduct operations transferred to him, he was granted
extension authority without further proof of fitness, to avoid inconvenience of a
further hearing. McDougald Com. Car. Applic., 531 (533).

That applicant, after denial of Texas certificate, had continued operating under
court order did not disqualify him when State commission had subsequently
granted him a certificate for interstate operation, contingent on similar grant by
Commission, and its representative, who constituted the joint board which heard
the instant application, recommended such a grant. Fisher Com. Car. Applic.-
New Operation, 695 (701).
COMMON CONTROL, MANAGEMENT, OR ARRANGEMENT. See also
EXEMPTIONS. Applicant's single-State operation, and that of corporation owned
and officered by applicant and her husband over disconnected interstate routes,
were found to be conducted as a single business when their combined routes were
operated as a single through route. Luter Applic. for Registration, 150.

When applicant corporations were controlled and managed by one individual,
and most of interstate service of one was performed on billing of the other, their
operations represented a single transportation business and separate identities

were mere fictions. Issuance of certificate to one was therefore conditioned on
dismissal of the other's application. United Van Lines, Inc., Extension, 451
(461).
COMMUTER TRAFFIC. See PASSENGERS.
COMPENSATION. See DIVISIONS OF RATES; and Definition under CONTRACT

and PRIVATE CARRIERS.
COMPENSATORY RATES. See also COMPETITION (Rail); Cost OF SERVICE
(Factor in Reasonableness); MINIMUM RATES. Although no evidence as to cost
was submitted, carrier's testimony that proposed rate would be compensatory
was entitled to weight in view of its experience in the considered transportation.
Metals, Chemicals, St. Louis to Cincinnati and Louisville, 55 (56).

Compensatory character of proposed rate should be measured by minimum
revenue based on proposed minimum weight, rather than on greater speculative
loadings. Iron and Steel by Roadway Transit Co., Mich. to Ill., 747 (751).
COMPETITION. See also ALL-COMMODITY RATES; COMMODITY RATES; CON-

VENIENCE AND NECESSITY (Extension of Operations); INCREASED RATES (Gen-
eral Increases); PASSENGERS (Chartered or Special, etc.); ROUTES (Alter-
nate); TRANSPORTATION (Adequate Service); WATER AND MOTOR.

CARRIER: Mere maintenance by one transportation agency of rates lower than
those of a competing agency does not violate the act. Boots and Shoes from
Boston, Hartford, and New York, 90 (93).

DESTRUCTIVE OR UNFAIR: A small carrier whose limited service does not entail
terminal and other expenses incurred by larger competitors should not be required
to maintain same rates, and that respondent's rates were lower than those of
complainant tariff bureau did not constitute a destructive competitive practice.
Middlewest Motor Frt. Bur. v. Schaffer, 368 (371-372).

Rail: See also REASONABLENESS, ETC. (Basis of Construction). Principal
question in determining lawfulness of rail-competitive motor rates is not whether
they are definitely related to the rail rates, but whether they are reasonably
compensatory. Wool to Twin Cities from Minn, Points, 107 (115).

Although motor carriers must maintain rates on phosphates no more than 1
cent higher than rail rates, to secure any of the traffic, rate on that basis and on
rail minimum exceeding capacity of single vehicles and load limits of all States
traversed was unlawful. Minimum Weight on Trisodium Phosphate, 407 (410).
COMPLAINTS. See also PARTIES.

DISMISSAL: Dismissal of complaints alleging failure to perform service, on
ground that carriers had resumed service and the issues were moot, denied.
Complainants before Commission have no unqualified right to withdraw, as
Commission's decisions are not only conclusive of the rights of interested parties,
but affect many not directly represented before it. Conclusions as to obligation
to perform service would be a guide for others similarly situated, and issues were
therefore not moot. Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc., v. Santa Fe Trail Transp.
Co., 212 (213, 214); Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc., v. Consolidated Freightways,
Inc., 225 (226).
CONDITIONS. See COMMON CONTROL, ETC.; Key Points; RAIL AND MOTOR.
CONFLICTING RATES. See SCHEDULES.
CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION. See also ALL-COMMODITY

RATES; EMERGENCY PRICE CONTROL ACTS; INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT;
PARTIES; PRIVATE CARRIERS; SAVING CLAUSES.

LEGISLATIVE INTENT: Intent to grant Commission broader power as to re-
troactive adjustment of divisions of motor-carrier than of rail rates is evident in
different phrasing of secs. 216 (f) and 15 (6), and by reversion to language of sec.
15 (6) in enacting sec. 307 (e) respecting divisions of water rates. Highway
Motor Frt. Lines, Inc., 0. A. C. E. Transp. Co., Inc., 513 (515).

« PreviousContinue »