Document: 361 U.S. 173 80 S.Ct. 229 4 L.Ed.2d 223 MINNEAPOLIS & ST. LOUIS RAILWAY COMPANY, Appellant,v.UNITED STATES of America et al. STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA al., Appellants, v. UNITED MINNESOTA Nos. 12, 27, 28. Argued Nov. 16, 17, 1959. Decided Dec. 14, Rehearing Denied Jan. 18, 1960. April See 945, 405. [Syllabus from pages 173-175 intentionally omitted] Messrs. Max Swiren, Chicago, Ill., and Harold J. Soderberg, for appellants. Robert W. Ginnane, Washington, D.C., Starr Thomas, appellees. Mr. Justice WHITTAKER delivered the opinion Court. 1 These appeals present questions arising out rival applications by several rail carriers to Interstate Commerce Commission under § 5(2) Act1 authority acquire control Toledo, Peoria Western Railroad Company. 2 'Western' is an independent, shortline 'bridge carrier'2 through eastwest traffic by-passing congested Chicago gateway. Its line about 234 miles long, extending its connection with Pennsylvania Company ('Pennsylvania') at Effner, on Illinois-Indiana state line, westward, Peoria, main Atchison, Topeka Santa Fe Railway ('Santa Fe') Lomax, Illinois, thence southwesterly a short distance Keokuk, Iowa. headquarters, shops yards are located in East where it has 24 executives where, elsewhere along 225 other employees. It connections interchange 16 railroads, principal ones being New York, St. Louis ('Nickel Plate'), Illinois Terminal Company, Burlington Quincy ('Burlington') Minneapolis ('Minneapolis') Peoria. 10 railroads 17 towns line. 3 outstanding 90,000 shares common capital stock, 82% which owned testamentary trustees estate George P. McNear—Wilmington Trust Guy Gladson—and remaining 18% members McNeaar family, bank president Western. In 1954, determined sell their efforts were commenced Minneapolis, one hand, Pennsylvania, purchase it. (Four Wilmington Company's directors also Pennsylvania.) Those negotiations culminated contract between Fe, dated May 26, 1955, providing sale former latter stock price $135 per share, subject Commission's approval.3 Soon afterward, like agreements made holders stock. On June 28, entered into wholly subsidiary 50 % fthe share,4 approval Commission. 5 July 8, parent, applied Act5 those consequent joint The intervened objected application, as did States Minnesota South Dakota respective public service regulatory commissions. 6 Thereafter, October 13, Commission, same section Act, sole Western, expressing willingness enter contracts Western's stockholders terms set forth existing Fe. proceeding application. 7 motion consolidated two proceedings. seven having intervened. Two them sought authority, all events,6 others stated conditions,7 participate, s 5(2)(d) acquisition equal basis successful applicant. State 18 cities or chambers commerce labor organizations representing employees, large number shippers over support Fe-Pennsylvania application opposition 8 After extended hearing before him, examiner issued proposed report recommending dismissal upon exceptions, briefs arguments support, Division report. was confronted, said, four alternative proposals, (1) authorization (2) (3) events, more conditions, participate applicant,8 (4) denial both applications. 9 observed that '(t)hese proceedings represent new complicated phase administration 5, since (they involve) property, petitions inclusion transaction varying circumstances.' recognized that, Act National Transportation Policy,9 required 'weigh whether each consistent interest, without considering not only intervening petitioners seeking such but applicant nonparticipating well.' thought burden proof 'most heavy this, because must overbalance claims share exclude transaction.' conceived be duty, Policy, 'arrive standard interest determine various plans most nearly approximates it.' found plan contemplates 'will continue operated separate independent carrier responsible management lines'; maintain own solicitation forces will entirely free solicit manner best serve interests Western,' 'existing routes channels trade via maintained kept open discrimination connecting lines railroad.' found, 'unequivocally disappearance neutral 15 presently works'; '(f)or practical purposes would integrated, consolidated, merged ownership, operation'; features 'would extremely harmful carriers'; headquarters office eliminated, leaving trainmaster roadmaster point, employment employees severed. 11 further '(o)nly supporting interveners, Dakota, advocate operating carrier,' parties to, intervenors in, 'insist operation local necessity.' then '(p)ublic demands policies respects continued.' thereupon ultimate finding, 5(2)(b) 'within scope amended; conditions (by them) just reasonable, interest.' order approving Sante dismissing denying 295 I.C.C. 523. 12 petitioned whole reconsideration, alternatively requested if permitted stand, authorized equally terms. That petition denied. 13 timely filed complaint District Court against United vacate order. commissions, interested strengthening operates States, complaint. defendants answered, asserting full legality numerous who Nickel Plate intervened, complaining had improperly denied request 14 A three-judge court convened and, after hearing, rendered judgment sustaining 165 F.Supp. 893. commission, case brought here we noted probable jurisdiction. 359 933, 79 647, 635. All Court, except Plate, appellees this supported contends, first, adopted outset 'separate management' criterion governing comparative merits plans, antithetic thereby deprived 'fair consideration,' erred action. record does contention. Rather, shows 'public interest,' although ultimately find served continued carrier.' We believe recited findings show carefully 'weighed' considered 'each application' labors which, either, 'consistent (a) works,' (b) certain carriers,' (c) elimination separation (d) witnesses insisted 'that necessity,' fully conclusional finding though Minneapolis' deprive but, contrary, seems us, fair consideration, err so holding. Appellants' contention appears create combination restraint violation Sherman Act10 lessen competition tend monoply Clayton Act,11 abuse power. face these contentions seem run teeth language purpose 5(11) Act. section, substance, provides 'The conferred shall exclusive plenary, any corporation participating * approved thereunder, have power carry effect operate properties exercise franchises acquired said provisions they hereby relieved antitrust laws restraints, limitations, prohibitions law insofar may necessary enable (it) provided accordance any, imposed hold, maintain, Stat. 380, amended, 54 908, 49 U.S.C. 5(11), U.S.C.A. 5(11). 19 Section recent specific expression congressional policy than relieves acquiring carrier, acquisition, 'from *.' Although authorize 'ignore' laws, McLean Trucking Co. 321 67, 80, 64 370, 88 L.Ed. 544, there can 'little doubt measure proposals (acquisitions) standards laws.' page 85—86, 379. problem accommodation legislation. remains obligated 'estimate appraise effects curtailment result (acquisition) consider advantages improved (and matters interest) assist effectuating over-all transportation policy.' 87, 381. 20 Even acquisitions might otherwise violate Congress approve them, finds 'because some circumstances appropriate effectuation national policy. informed furthered 'encouraging organization stronger units' industry. And authorizing import general anti-trust permissibility. participants appropriae requirements laws. 5(11).' 85, presumed enacting legislation, took account fact strict regulation supervision. 'Against background, no inference possible factor determining property (railroad acquisitions) preservation among carriers, still value, significant chiefly aids attainment objective U.S., 380. 21 As railroad acquisitions, bound permit overbear what 'the contrary view would, effect, offend 'As been render meaningless exemption relieving properly 86, Resolution conflicting considerations 'is complex task requires extensive facilities, expert considerable knowledge left 'to end wisdom experience used form transportation, coordination forms.' Cong.Rec. 12207. commission,' courts, Cf. Central R. Co., 215 452, 30 155, 280; 236 351, 35 59 616; Heights 310 344, 60 931, 84 1243; Purcell 315 381, 62 709, 86 910.' 87—88, 22 Here, gave consideration anti-competitive advanced appellants, devoting five matter. '(a)ll endeavoring Western'; 'important thing possibility competition, probability potential diminished strangled Pennsylvania.' analysis facts evidence, lessening competition. pointed Fe's 'long haul' Pennsylvania's 'next longest (its haul Louis) agreed, bound, place Lomax parity standpoint, recognize Effner interchanges Louis'; 'there diversion traffic, jeopardize maintenance adequate objecting carriers.' 23 prolonged receivership until 1927 when McNear receiver's sale, W.R. Acquisition, 124 181. modern existence began time guidance McNear, built fine railroad; McNear's death, 1947, continued, much success, he established. policies, were, are, neutrality connections, matter how slight (as bridge) route, bypassing terminals Louis,' plan. think clear summary estimated appraised done so, concluded ilessening making determination rests turn, substantial evidence well within limits discretion 25 Appellants argue actuality, contracted 50% co-trustee trust, persons companies, violates Act; it; event, action 'condoning' power; reasons also, upholding 26 entering trust 'acting behalf alone.' But even assume, purposes, acting same. prohibits engaged 'any dealings securities' $50,000, aggregate, year, 'with another corporation, board person director (of) purchases (as) competitive bidding regulations prescribed (the) Commission.' 38 734, 20, 20. 27 is, course, law,12 relative applicable evident prohibit abusing palming off securities, supplies articles excessive prices overreaching by, misfeasance of, directors, financial injury impairment ability interest.13 But, securities might, circumstances, Congress, doing interest. expressly approval, tock not, absence supra, 28 proposes factors bearing them. exceed statutory confined discretion. 29 contends futuro confers 'no purge taint illegal Whether merit contention, legal abstraction, need decide, contractual arrangements asks look future. Neither nor consummated transaction, become effective upon, Apart criminal prosecutions, concerned, plain says, relieve next contend violated 8(b) Administrative Procedure failing make think, compelled evidence. 31 There applies Riss 341 907, 71 620, 95 1345, see Eastern 344 917, 73 346, 97 707. last sentence provides: 32 'All (administrative) decisions part include statement conclusions, therefor, material issues fact, law, presented record; rule, order, sanction, relief, thereof.'14 33 Upon language, appellants should agreed pay excessive. Though express discuss it, pointing certified value ratemaking $13,500,000; preferred relatively debt; earning arm's length; offered $133 few days share; price. other. 34 basis, greatly strengthen eliminating many duplicating facilities reducing expenses $1,770,000 annually. matter, give saving—more $1,300,000 annually—would expense employees—a command clause 5(2)(c) (see note 1), evidently afforded protection absorption attrition permitted. Again, more. challenge failure findings, considered, relate collateral immaterial require By 8(b), subordinate every advanced, 'material.' From thorough examination record, persuaded 5(2), 36 Finally, inadequate unable least afford proper judicial review, merely 'rubber stamped' conclusions fairly decided raised accorded reached right result. Accordingly affirmed. 37 Affirmed. DOUGLAS dissents. (24 905, 5(2)) provides, pertinent part, that: '(a) lawful, subdivision paragraph— '(i) jointly, ownership *. '(b) Whenever paragraph, therefor notify (designated parties), reasonable opportunity heard. If specified below made, hearing; held cases involved unless determines modifications paragraph modifications, '(c) passing weight following considerations, others: public; inclusion, include, territory transaction; total fixed charges resulting anected. '(d) involving prerequisite require, equitable terms, involved, requesting '(f) condition chapter, arrangement protect affected term carrier' mean short-line transports long-line another. During negotiations, first $69.50, later $80, 15, obtained letter commitments 26% $100 share. (Near Rock Island offer accepted.) dispute arose—and apparently exists Pennsylvania—with respect validity commitments. Thereupon, accepted, acting, 'on alone,' date contract, accordingly, prejudice claims, causes rights commitment stock; event trustees, commitment, shares, obligation reduced accordingly. litigation then, yet, pending enforcement 1955. contained covenant essence, alone preserve communities direct access officials,' improved, of' (Western) railroad,' (5) Board Directors consist members, whom company, officers both, six prominent citizens connected either selected mutual agreement. 1. Plate') Pacific ('Rock Island') included applicants. Wabash ('Wabash') object continuation junctions gateways relations arrangements, asked, they, too, therein extent railroad. ('Illinois Central'), Gulf, Mobile Ohio ('Gulf') North ('North Western') asked approved, conditioned gateways. Monon contain requirement grant trackage rights, done, notes 7. preceding 1, 543, 209, 731, 18. 'antitrust laws' referred (1952 ed.) "Anti-trust laws,' sections 14—21, 22—27 title, includes 1—27 title.' Moreover, avoids ambiguity including 'all Federal, State, municipal.' legislative history meager, supports text. drafts 10, together types abuses cited enactment, suggests strongly words 'dealings intended cover carrier's related securities. H.R.Rep.No.627, 63d Cong., 2d Sess., p. 3; S.Rep.No.698, pp. 47—48; S.Doc.No.585, 8—9: 51 15943. 242, 1007(b), 1007(b).

Category: 7