Document: 382 U.S. 281 86 S.Ct. 423 15 L.Ed.2d 324 PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSIONv.The RAILROAD CO. No. 375. Dec. 13, 1965. William A. Goichman and Joseph C. Bruno, for appellant. Hugh B. Cox Windsor F. Cousins, appellee. PER CURIAM. 1 In the three-judge District Court from which this appeal comes to us, Pennsylvania Railroad Company sued enjoin enforcement of a duly promulgated order Public Utility Commission on sole ground that conflicted with federal statute. The Commission, among other defenses, contended statute was unconstitutional, but decided case in favor railroad issued an appropriate injunction. 240 F.Supp. 233. 2 It follows our recent decision Swift & Co. v. Wickham, 111, 258, 194, injunction sought by railroad, being based incompatibility between state statute, not grounded 'unconstitutionality' measure so as require tribunal under 28 U.S.C. § 2281 (1964 ed.). Nor is 2282, requiring such 'any Act Congress repugnance Constitution,' invoked Commission's defense unconstitutional; it settled provision 'does provide where validity act merely drawn question, albeit question be decided, only there application interlocutory or permanent restrain Congress.' International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union Donnelly Co., 304 243, 250, 58 875, 879, 82 L.Ed. 1316. 3 Because court required adjudicate suit, has no jurisdiction 1253 ed.) entertain direct appeal. does appear record lodged protective Appeals, time do almost certainly expired. occurred before supra, reason why should deprived appellate review. accordance precedent, we vacate judgment below remand may enter fresh decree timely taken Appeals. See Phillips United States, 312 246, 254, 61 480, 484, 85 800. 4 ordered. 5 Judgment vacated remanded Court.

Category: 8