Legal Document

460 U.S. 533 103 S.Ct. 1343 75 L.Ed.2d 260 THURSTON MOTOR LINES, INC.v.JORDAN K. RAND, LTD. No. 82-713. March 28, 1983. PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner is a common carrier authorized by the Interstate Commerce Commission to transport commodities. When respondent allegedly failed pay $661.41 in motor freight charges, petitioner filed suit United States District Court. Its complaint alleged that for services as required petitioner's tariffs on file with Commission. The also action arose under Act, 49 U.S.C. § 10741(a), and Court had jurisdiction pursuant 28 1337. 2 dismissed matter want of subject Appeals Ninth Circuit affirmed. 682 F.2d 811 (1982). Characterizing "simple contract-collection action," court could not "discern any proposition federal law need confront deciding what, if anything, can be recovered." Id., at 812. 3 Under construed this Court, was error. In Louisville & Nashville R. v. Rice, 247 201, 38 429, 62 L.Ed. 1071 (1918), squarely held federal-question existed over recover $145 due an interstate shipment regulated Act. 4 "The Act requires collect consignee all lawful charges duly prescribed tariff respect every shipment. Their duty obligation grow out depend upon act." U.S., 202, S.Ct., 429. 5 Other courts have no difficulty following clear import Rice. See Madler Artoe, 494 323 (CA7 1974); Bernstein Bros. Pipe Machinery Co. Denver R.G.W.R. Co., 193 441 (CA10 1951); Maritime Service Sweet Brokerage De Puerto Rico, 537 560 (CA1 1976). 6 Appeals' attempt distinguish "most troublesome precedent" wholly unconvincing. its view, Rice turned fact billed shipper additional amount that, while tariffs, contrary parties' understanding.* Unlike complaint, agreed sought; there rely exclusively override understanding. There support novel interpretation or elsewhere. That attempted avoid payment invoking estoppel defense accurate enough portrayal facts, but does obscure claim law. "As shipments," stated, "the parties are responsibilities imposed law, exclusion other rules obligation." A carrier's is, necessity, predicated understanding shipper. This true equally here. approach, question would defenses pleaded shipper—but we long ago settled it character which determines whether jurisdiction. Public Serv. Comm'n Utah Wycoff 344 237, 248, 73 236, 242, 97 291 (1952); Phillips Petr. Texaco, Inc., 415 125, 127, 94 1002, 1003, 39 209 (1974). short, has simply confused factual contours unmistakable holding. 7 Perhaps unsure distinction went "doubt still good law." Needless say, only may overrule one precedents. Until occurs, decision below cannot reconciled it. petition certiorari granted, judgment reversed, case remanded further proceedings consistent opinion. 8 So ordered. * requiring assess immediately delivery livestock. arrangement allowed include transportation costs price livestock sold. dispute resulted from billing after sale cover disinfecting cars. charge complied tariffs.

Classification Label: 8