Citation network
Trans Alaska Pipeline Rate Cases
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 06, 1978
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
- Distinguished
- Distinguished
-
exceed lawful rates, notwithstanding the absence of express authority in the statute for such refunds. United States v. ChesapeakeSearch
-
or interim tariffs -- which were later determined (after full hearing) to be unlawful. Mobil Alaska Pipeline Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
set, by the carriers were unreasonable or unjust in the context of granting reparations to injured shippers. See ICC v. CincinnattiSearch
-
United States v. ChesapeakeSearch
-
the Commission was able to complete an investigation as required by the Hepburn Act. See Arrow Transportation Co. v. SouthernSearch
-
Commissioner v. BrownSearch
-
United States v. SCRAPSearch
-
No. 7752, Mobil Alaska Pipeline Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
No. 7757, Exxon Pipeline Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
No. 77-551, BP Pipelines, Inc. v. UnitedSearch
-
and No. 77-602, ARCO Pipe Line Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
defended the practice as being consistent with Commission practice and a consent decree entered in United States v. AtlanticSearch
-
In the Court of Appeals, the United States argued that Arrow Transportation Co. v. SouthernSearch
-
R. Co., 372 U. S. 658 (1963), and United States v. SCRAPSearch
-
Therefore, we conclude that Congress did not mean to cut off judicial review for such limited purposes. Cf. Dunlop v. BachowskiSearch
-
Northern Pac. R. Co. v. PacificSearch
-
Jewett Bros. & Jewett v. ChicagoSearch
-
Norwegian Nitrogen Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
meaning of the latter sections should be given significant weight in construing the former. See United States v. FreemanSearch
-
United States v. StewartSearch
-
Erlenbaugh v. UnitedSearch
-
tariff simply because it has already suspended other tariffs for the same service. See American Tel. & Tel. Co. v. FCCSearch
-
Mobil Alaska Pipeline Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
See ICC v. CincinnattiSearch
-
the Hepburn Act. See Arrow Transportation Co. v. SouthernSearch
-
Exxon Pipeline Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
BP Pipelines, Inc. v. UnitedSearch
-
ARCO Pipe Line Co. v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. AtlanticSearch
-
Arrow Transportation Co. v. SouthernSearch
-
and United States v. SCRAPSearch
-
Cf. Dunlop v. BachowskiSearch
-
Northern Pac. R. Co. v. PacificSearch
-
See United States v. FreemanSearch
-
See American Tel. & Tel. Co. v. FCCSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial