Document: 355 U.S. 554 78 S.Ct. 496 2 L.Ed.2d 484 ANDREW G. NELSON, Inc., Appellant,v.UNITED STATES of America et al. No. 16. Argued Dec. 11, 1957. Decided March 3, 1958. Rehearing Denied April 14, See 356 934, 770. Mr. Paul E. Blanchard, for appellant. Roger Fisher, Washington, D.C., appellees. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion Court. 1 This appeal concerns scope a contract carrier permit granted appellant by Interstate Commerce Commission under 'grandfather clause' Motor Carrier Act 1935.1 The interpreted 'stock in trade drug stores,' commodity description appellant's permit, to authorize carriage only those goods which at time movement are, or are intended become, part stock drugstore. On basis that interpretation, an appropriate cease and desist order prohibiting unauthorized was entered. 63 M.C.C. 407. After three-judge District Court refused enjoin enforcement order, 150 F.Supp. 181, direct taken this Court, we noted probable jurisdiction. 1956, 352 905, 77 146, 115. For reasons hereinafter stated affirm judgment Appellant's predecessor, Andrew Nelson, having operated as before enactment Act, applied continue his operation subsequent passage contemplated § 209(a) thereof. application described Nelson's complete 'transportation * store fixtures miscellaneous merchandise, household employes, Walgreen Co., connection with opening, closing remodeling stores.' In supporting affidavit Nelson he 'an interstate property Company it alone from Retail Stores commodities so transported (being) usually equipment merchandise opening stock.' Filed were 17 delivery receipts showing 1934—1935. 3 13, 1942, issued controversy without hearing, relying on papers filed Nelson. authorized '(n)ew used fixtures, new goods, stores'2 over irregular routes 10 States. Upon incorporation 1951, identical corporation, here. 1954, investigation determine if operating beyond bounds its authority revealed carrying wide range many kinds shippers, including groceries grocery stores, beer wine liquor distributors, dry glue manufacturers gummed products, automobile batteries department stores. held such carriage, all attempted justify violated 209 prohibits authorizing business question. 4 Appellant contends critical language is generic reference place sale, entitling transport like stocked present-day drugstores any consignee within territory. Commission, however, regards these words use, more limited carriage: moving drugstore sale therein, elsewhere, then intention they ultimately will become argues use no consequence here because (1) restrictions never descriptions (2) developed long after issuance cannot now be retroactively. Finally, offered evidence much extensive grandfather than set out affidavits, erred excluding evidence. 5 Before considering contentions, first note plain meaning controlling absence ambiguity specialized usage trade. Neither parties believes patently ambiguous,3 nor do consider such. Moreover, unwilling say instant term art, while specifically asserts not. Consequently, ordinary determinative. ascertaining meaning, not given carte blanche; just '(t)he precise delineation enterprise seeks protection 'grandfather' clause has been reserved Commission,' Noble v. United States, 1943, 319 88, 93, 950, 952, 87 L.Ed. 1277, construction courts unless clearly erroneous. Dart Transit Co. Comm'n, 110 876, affirmed, 1953, 345 980, 73 1138, 97 1394.4 6 construing found controverted use; them equivalent 'drug stores' stock' analogized latter 'contractors' equipment'5 'packing house supplies.'6 required 7 rejected contention sale.7 making equates permit's 'goods sold It obvious us reading enlarges words. As pointed examiner, M.C.C., 414, connotes possession, therefore lends itself readily does stores.'8 examination Commission's decisions indicates definite distinctive linguistic pattern whenever made sale: purpose transportation named consistently phrase 'such as,' close variation thereof.9 Yet there present permit. These considerations bulwarked record put hauling Walgreen's stock, might Walgreen. balance, therefore, compelled think right; certainly wrong. 8 embody restriction formulated until retroactively limitation same. challenges assertion prior unnecessary resolve question, however. Assuming test appeared technique predecessor obtained still free interpret done. Its determination accords common, used, way strains artificializes meaning.10 If fairly lend themselves here, always have done so. retroactive could work prejudice appellant; once determined neither less manner arrived conclusion controlling.11 9 interpretation limits actual—though previously unasserted operations carried thus subverting substantial parity should establish between pre-Act post-Act operations. Alton R. 315 15, 62 432, 86 586. so, remedy lies elsewhere: event correctly reflect operation, carrier's recourse petition Commissions reopen proceedings consideration brought attention. Such answer charge violation, since collaterally attacked. Callanan Road Improvement 507, 803, 1206; Comm'n Consolidated Freightways, 41 651. To hold otherwise would render meaningless congressional requirement Act. arguments based noncompliance Administrative Procedure 60 Stat. 237, U.S.C. §§ 1001—1011, U.S.C.A. merit. 11 Affirmed. 12 DOUGLAS dissents. became Part II Section 209(a), 49 552, amended, 52 1238, 64 575, 309(a)(1), makes unlawful engage motor vehicle Commission; proviso thereto provides shall issue matter course upon operate route interest bona fide July 1, 1935. That commonly called clause.' Since party attaches significance certain underscoring italicize language. argue alternatively adopted, necessarily ambiguous. considerable twisting earlier position, maintained throughout proceedings, phraseology exhibits indefiniteness. regard, held, 'We agree examiner's patent warrant our going back giving events issuance.' 409. Absent ambiguity, well established refer underlying operation. P. Saldutti & Son, Inc.—Interpretation Permit, 593. Even documents describe solely Drug Company; admits gives 'the impression Walgreen.' background nowise supports position shows actually destined drugstore, merely store. Although offers Walgreen, seems intent issuing ascertained unknown issuance. true, course, limitations power modify permits, 212(a) by-passed guise interpretative action. being simply definitive declaration what rights existed very beginning equated modification, C. H. Transportation Co.—Interpretation Certificate, 586, holding supplies' when contractor; similar branch armed services unauthorized. Co.—Modification 607, means supplies fact packing house, houses. contending, then, applying begs question issue. McAteer Contract Application, 42 35, phrases in' of.' opinion's single phrase, support contention. See, e.g., Ratner, CCH Fed.Carriers Cases 80,415 ('such dealt wholesale food houses'); Anton Vidas 106 retail mail-order National Trucking Extension Electrical Appliances, 51 638 hardware stores'); Sanders Operations, 47 210 general 35 wholesale, retail, chain Onondaga Freight Corp. Common 28 53 Keystone 19 475 houses'). Contrast Bird 61 311, reversed, 159 717; Johnson Truck Service Salvino, 329, reversed Salvino 119 277, relies. test, descriptive rather determinative: describes result taking face value, sense factor arriving result.

Category: 8