DETROIT, TOLEDO AND IRONTON RAILROAD COMPANY (82-3251),
Soo Line Railroad Company (82-3363),
Minneapolis, Northfield and Southern Railway, Inc. (82-3364),
The Kansas City Southern Railway Company (82-3385), Petitioners,
v.
UNITED STATES of America and Interstate Commerce Commission, Respondents.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued October 27, 1982.
Decided January 12, 1984.
Rehearing and Rehearing Denied March 28, 1984.
Rehearing Denied April 25, 1984.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Earl C. Opperthauser, John C. Danielson, argued, Detroit, Mich., for Detroit, Toledo & Ironton R. Co.
C. Harold Peterson, Minneapolis, Minn., for Soo Line R. Co.
David M. Schwartz, Sullivan & Worcester, Washington, D.C., Robert K. Dreiling, Kansas City, Mo., for Kansas City Southern R. Co.
Robert N. Kharasch, argued, Edward Greenberg, Olga Biokess, Rhonda Migdail, Galland, Kharasch, Calkins & Morse, Washington, D.C., for petitioners in Nos. 83-3363, 82-3364 and 82-3385.
Richard A. Allen, Lawrence H. Richmond, argued, Washington, D.C., John J. Powers, III, Kenneth P. Kolson, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for respondents.
Harold E. Mesirow, Lillick, McHose & Charles, Washington, D.C., for Atty. Gen. of British Columbia, The Foss Launch & Tug Co.
Gordon P. MacDougall, Washington, D.C., for Patrick W. Simmons.
Daniel S. Kuntz, Asst. Atty. Gen., N.D. Public Service Com'n, Bismarck, N.D., for N.D. Public Service Com'n.
Richard A. Hollander, Richmond, Va., for Family Lines Rail System & Chessie System R.R.
Eugene T. Liipfert, Washington, D.C., for Florida East Coast R. Co.
Donald E. Engle, Burlington Northern R. Co., St. Paul, Minn., for Burlington Northern R. Co.
Louis P. Warchot, argued, San Francisco, Cal., for Southern Pacific Transp. Co., St. Louis & Southwestern R.R.
Before LIVELY, Chief Judge, and KENNEDY and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied March 28, 1984.
BOYCE F. MARTIN, Jr., Circuit Judge.
Petitioners seek review of an Interstate Commerce Commission decision removing certain protective conditions imposed on railroad mergers by the Commission during the past sixty years. We have jurisdiction to hear this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2342.
An understanding of this case requires some knowledge about the railroad merger process. Railroads wishing...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
