Southern_Pacific_Terminal_Co._v._ICC

<i>Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. ICC</i>

Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. ICC

1911 United States Supreme Court case

Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. ICC, 219 U.S. 498 (1911), was a United States Supreme Court decision that held that while normally, in order for the court to hear a case, there must still be a controversy outstanding, when the issue was such that it would be of short duration, and would most likely become moot before appellate review could take place, and that the issue was likely to reoccur, then the court could hear the issue.[1]

Quick Facts Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. ICC, Argued December 9, 1910 Decided February 20, 1911 ...

Issue

A division of the Southern Pacific Railroad was aiding a cottonseed exporter in the Port of Galveston by negotiating discount wharf fees on his behalf in exchange for requiring farmers to haul the crop exclusively in Southern Pacific railcars. When the Interstate Commerce Commission challenged the arrangement as anti-competitive, the contract was terminated but the ICC felt similar product tying would reoccur once the case was dismissed as moot.

The court's decision

The court referred to this condition as,

The case is not moot where interests of a public character are asserted by the Government under conditions that may be immediately repeated, merely because the particular order involved has expired... The rule that this court will only determine actual controversies, and will dismiss if events have transpired pending appeal which render it impossible to grant the appellant effectual relief does not apply to an appeal involving [a government] order .. merely because that order has expired. Such orders are usually continuing and capable of repetition, and their consideration, and the determination of the right of the Government and the carriers to redress, should not be defeated on account of the shortness of their term.

This condition, known as "capable of repetition, yet evading review,"[2] has allowed the court to take cases which it otherwise would be unable to decide upon, because the appellant would otherwise have no grounds to appeal. This issue has become important in a number of areas including First Amendment cases involving press coverage of trials,[3] and to statutes involving abortion.[4]

See also

References

  1. [1]
    Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. ICC, 219 U.S. 498 (1911).
  2. [2]
    219 U.S. at 515.
  3. [3]
    Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980).
  4. [4]
    Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973).


Stub icon

This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
Share this article:

This article uses material from the Wikipedia article Southern_Pacific_Terminal_Co._v._ICC, and is written by contributors. Text is available under a CC BY-SA 4.0 International License; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.