Document: 376 U.S. 389 84 S.Ct. 884 11 L.Ed.2d 797 UNITED STATES et al., Appellants,v.J. B. MONTGOMERY, INC. No. 66. Argued Jan. 8, 1964. Decided March 23, Rehearing Denied May 4, See 377 925, 1218. Frank I. Goodman, Beverly Hills, Cal., for appellants, pro hac vice, by special leave of Court. Charles W. Singer, Washington, D.C., appellee. Mr. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion 1 This appeal tests validity an order Interstate Commerce Commission issued under § 212(c) Act as amended in 1957, 71 Stat. 411, 49 U.S.C. 312(c),1 converting appellee's contract carrier permit into a common certificate but limiting its coverage 'to movements from, to, or between outlets other facilities particular businesses class shippers with whom it may now contract.' Appellee contends that this limitation violates mandate Congress any so 'shall authorize transportation, carrier, same commodities points within territory authorized permit.' The answers restrictions are necessary to maintain 'substantial parity' old and new operations. District Court held 'without statutory authority impose question' set aside remanded case further proceedings. 206 F.Supp. 455, 461. Probable jurisdiction was noted. 372 952, 83 951, 9 977. We affirm judgment. 2 Prior 1957 appellee operated originally 1943 'grandfather' clause contained 209(a) Motor Carrier Act, 1935, 543, 552.2 It permitted carriage of: (1) such usually dealt wholesale retail hardware automobile-accessory business houses, connection therewith, equipment, materials supplies used conduct business; (2) in, used, meat, fruit, vegetable packing houses; (3) department stores. 'Keystone restriction'3 which limited transporting only contracts persons operating specified. wide variety specified territories, without consignee, those engaged businesses. 3 In at behest Commission, definition 203(a)(15) thereafter read: 4 'The term 'contract motor vehicle' means person engages transportation vehicle passengers property interstate foreign commerce, compensation (other than referred paragraph (14) exception therein), continuing one number either (a) furnishing services through assignment vehicles period time exclusive use each served (b) designed meet distinct need individual customer.'4 5 protect existing permits, enacted 212(c), which, we have indicated, provided revocation appropriate proceedings before issuance certificate. doing, however, resulting 6 1958 these were begun section and, after extended hearings, Examiner found should be revoked covering restrictions. addition he recommended inclusion 'materials, manufacturers rubber products, from Chicago, Illinois 100 miles Denver * *.' adopted latter recommendation not contested As remaining authorizations, appended recommendations restriction against combining 'tacking' various rights render service (likewise contested), also subjected grant following restriction: 7 'RESTRICTION: granted immediately above is restricted shipments moving outlets, 8 sole challenge raised proceeding. II. read light background, 'grandfather clause.' Its purpose, therefore, merely continue, expanding, carriers whose operations lawful United States v. Contract Steel Carriers, Inc., 350 409, 76 461, L.Ed. 482 (1956), revoking their permits issuing lieu thereof certificates. concludes that, while continuance commodity territorial limitations, intended effects restriction' carried forward one. Even if incorrect, says remains free reason general power confine limits. 10 difficulty argument carry 'dealt by' certain limitation, except required shipper engaged. Although has eliminated last requirement certificating imposed here limits outlets' insists cannot deliver supplier consumer, public warehouse ship dock, warehouses, consolidation transfer laborer modification agent. record does show whether exercised claimed privileges permit. hold did enjoy them others enumerated, then entitled freedom legislative history indicates Commis ion presentation on represented Chairman legislation would disturb no carrier. Indeed, asserted 'greater opportunity.'5 Moreover, restrictions' received attention Congress. Senate difference made clear, i.e., former 'character' type named they shippers. Common carriers, hand, way certificated territories.6 appears us converted good position previously enjoyed. Under facts claimed, done case. 12 do believe waived proving had face regard, proof understandably presented include whatever. At late date unfair strip upon basis. 13 Nor can rule powers. Since specifically commands 'shall' included permit, unable place unrelated sections, 208, where specific assure parity.' continued 14 judgment therefore affirmed. On remand will contest factual claims what performed limit activity. 15 Affirmed. 16 HARLAN, concurring. 17 I agree understand basic premise Court's holding—that may, over 'Keystone' carrier's certificate, limitations scope 18 language comments members Congress, traditional notion serves 'public' suggest congressional intent preclude Keystone certificates carriers. force, leads conclusion powerless prevent ven widest expansion previous activities replacement Absent regard compelling evidence cripple supervisory am constrained consistent provisions dealing national conclude entry types proscribed them. 19 Nonetheless, there persuasive support history, policy permitting inhibit open conversion. evinced subject conversion, view greater obligations owed more extensive regulation subject, difficult argue maintenance advantage possible prejudice renders impermissible allowed 20 determinative consideration fixing Commission's is, according principles, authorization conferred permit; absent dormancy abandonment, extent actual prior irrelevant. contended inconsistent fettered imposing concept parity,' questions abandonment proceedings, consider issue remand. 21 bases concur shall examine outstanding hundred eighty days Augus 22, institute proceeding own initiative, application holder actually operation complaint interested party, notice hearing revoke convenience necessity, finds, first, holding August conform force 1957; second, carrier; third, otherwise lawful. Such 411. provision substantially 309(a)(1): 'Except 310a title, engage commerce highway reservation unless respect authorizing business: Provided, That, 310 predecessor interest bona fide July 1, route routes since subsection twenty October 1935 phrase comes title proceeding, Transportation Co. Application, M.C.C. 475. approved Noble States, 319 88, 63 950, 87 1277 (1943). 303(a)(15). f rmer stated follows: agreements, therein) compensation.' 54 920. During hearings Subcommittee Foreign Committee colloquy occurred Barton, counsel committee, Clarke, chairman Commission: 'Mr. BARTON: you think constitutional changing, say, propose, common-carrier status? CLARKE: No; see none. isn't taking away anything have; disturbing giving him opportunity. He still serve his shippers, conversion bill opportunity well obligation.' (Emphasis added.) Hearings Surface Commerce, 85th Cong., 1st Sess., Transportation—Scope Authority I.C.C., p. 35. Id., 182.

Category: 7