Lehigh Valley Railroad v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners

Background

A railroad company asked federal courts to block a New Jersey utility board order that would eliminate two grade crossings in Hillsborough Township and substitute one overhead crossing. The Board’s plan, issued November 24, required work that the Board estimated would cost $324,000. The railroad argued a cheaper plan had been informally agreed with the State Highway Commission, that it had spent about $5,000 preparing, and that the Board’s order would be an unreasonable expense and confiscate the company’s property.

Reasoning

The Court considered whether the Board’s required cost was so unreasonable as to violate the railroad’s constitutional rights. It reviewed the crossing’s traffic, the road’s role as a busy route (Route 16, with future Route 29 traffic expected to rise), the engineering differences between the Board’s straight-under-bridge plan and the railroad’s curved-tunnel plan, and the State’s authority to protect public safety at crossings. The Court concluded the Board’s action was near the limit but not beyond reasonableness, and that New Jersey’s procedures allowed adequate review of the Board’s orders. For these reasons the Court affirmed the lower courts’ refusals to enjoin enforcement.

Real world impact

The ruling lets the state utility board’s order stand, so the railroad must carry out the crossing elimination as ordered and bear the expense unless a court shows the cost is clearly extravagant. The decision affirms that states may require costly safety or roadwork when justified by traffic, danger, and permanence of the improvement, but federal courts retain the power to set aside plainly unreasonable demands.

Dissents or concurrances

One Justice disagreed, calling the Board’s action arbitrary and saying imposing about $100,000 for objections to a six percent curve was an abuse of power.