Legal Document

382 U.S. 281 86 Supreme Court Reporter 423 15 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 324 PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSIONv.The RAILROAD CO. Number 375. Dec. 13, 1965. William Atlantic Goichman and Joseph C. Bruno, for appellant. Hugh baron Cox Windsor Federal KF105 F3 Cousins, appellee. PER CURIAM. 1 In the three-judge District 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 & company versus Wickham, 111, 258, 194, injunction sought by railroad, being based incompatibility between state statute, not grounded 'unconstitutionality' measure so as require tribunal under 28 Code KF62 § 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 States, 312 246, 254, 61 480, 484, 85 800. 4 ordered. 5 Judgment vacated remanded Court.

Classification Label: 8