ICC v. Illinois Central Railroad Company

Fri, 15 Oct 1909 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

233

Petitioner

ICC

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

Illinois Central Railroad Company

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Fuller Court (1906-1909)

Decided By

Fuller Court (1910)

Opinion

215 U.S. 452 (1910)

Argued

Friday, October 15, 1909

Decided

Monday, January 10, 1910

Facts of the Case

The railroad's policy did not supply enough coal cars to meet the demand from the mines along its right of way. The ICC ordered the railroad to end its practice. The railroad refused to obey the ICC order.

Question

Is the ICC order valid?

Conclusion

Though the Court had engaged in second-guessing the ICC, in this case the justices signaled that they would review commission orders only with regard to constitutional issues, construction of the statute, and the practical substance of the order. In upholding the order, Chief Justice White declared for the Court that the "[p]ower to make the order and not the mere expediency or wisdom of having made it is the question."

Standard Oil Co. of NJ v. United States

Mon, 14 Mar 1910 13:00:00 +0000

Case Basics

Docket No.

398

Petitioner

Standard Oil Co. of NJ

Petitioner Type

Petitioner

Respondent

United States

Respondent Type

Respondent

Heard By

Fuller Court (1910)

Decided By

White Court (1911)

Opinion

221 U.S. 1 (1911)

Argued

Monday, March 14, 1910

Decided

Monday, May 15, 1911

Facts of the Case

John D. Rockefeller owned the largest and richest trust in America. He controlled the nation's oil business and scorned congressional efforts to outlaw combinations in restraint of trade (i.e., antitrust). In 1909, a federal court found Rockefeller's company, Standard Oil, in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The court ordered the dissolution of the company.

Question

Did Standard Oil violate the Sherman Act?

Conclusion

Standard Oil lost, but White, for the majority, managed to amend the language of the Sherman Act such that only "unreasonable" contracts and combinations in restraint of trade would violate the law. Heretofore, the Act made all contracts and combinations in retraint of trade into law violations. In this case, the record shows that the Standard Oil trust was unreasonable.

Cases - 1909 term

ICC v. Illinois Central Railroad Company

Standard Oil Co. of NJ v. United States